Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Share
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16302
    Points : 16933
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  GarryB on Fri May 25, 2012 12:53 am

    The problem is that ABM systems are completely unregulated.

    There is no agreement or structure that would demand the US tell the Russians anything... like their hit to kill payloads are working out to be too expensive so they decided... without telling anyone especially their allies, that they will replace the hit to kill payloads with nuclear warheads. The US doesn't care about a few more nuclear explosions over asia or europe or the middle east... this is all about making the US safe from everything.
    avatar
    Sujoy

    Posts : 904
    Points : 1070
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  Sujoy on Mon May 28, 2012 10:39 am

    Russia does not actually need an ICBM to neutralize NATO missile shield .Russia can simply deploy Iskander-M missiles armed with a Thermobaric warhead in the Baltic enclave of Kaliningrad and around Russia's periphery, in order to be able to strike quickly against US missile defense systems.Given the fact that the Iskander uses special composite materials to reduce the radar signature of the missile to evade targeting radars employed by enemy surveillance sensors, UAVs and smart weapons it becomes that much more difficult for NATO to intercept an incoming Iskander.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16302
    Points : 16933
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  GarryB on Mon May 28, 2012 12:22 pm

    It certainly could, but how can it continue to follow the new Start treaty in good faith when the US is undermining the value of balance of that treaty.

    This is not about the US plans for 2013, this is about US plans for 2020 and beyond.

    The current plans for 2020 include comments about a ballistic missile shield able to deal with any threat.

    This potentially renders Russias nuclear deterrent questionable... remember the system can never be fully tested against Russian assets, so it really doesn't matter whether it is an effective ABM system or not.

    The belief that it might be effective is enough to make the US think it is no longer dealing with a Russia that can seriously damage it. In effect the US will start treating Russia the way it treats Iraq and Iran.

    It doesn't matter if it turns out that all these ABM systems are ineffective against Russian weapons... by then it is too late.

    Russia doesn't object to the US ABM system because it wants to attack the US... it objects to the US ABM system because it doesn't want to have to attack the US.

    MAD requires no trust at all, and no broken promise or stab in the back change of leadership in the US will effect the stability and peace as long as the US can wipe Russia off the map and Russia can do the same to the US.

    For Russia it makes the most sense to object now and nip it all in the bud before either the US and Russia have spend a ridiculous amount of money on something that will never be needed.

    Plan B is to analyse the new system and look at simple and cheap ways of undermining it, so the US wastes a lot of money and gets a white elephant that helps them sleep at night with the false sense of security they seem so desperate to get.

    Either way the US is going to be spending billions it really doesn't seem to have right now, but the American people just don't seem to care... so why should I?

    Worst case scenario for Russia is to simply withdraw from the INF treaty and the new Start treaty and also the convention that bans nuclear weapons in space. All future Russian military satellites can be fitted to carry small nuclear weapons... lots of nukes going off in space above Europe and Japan and the US will blind most assets using radar and IR sensors long enough to let enough missiles through to do the job.

    The irony is that the US relies on space based assets and the INF and new Start agreements are useful to them too... much more useful than a system that might stop a missile that Iran might launch at the US... but even that logic is flawed because the act of building an ABM system pretty much guarantees a sensible enemy will find some much cheaper and easier way to deliver a warhead to the US... they could smuggle a nuclear weapon to Turkey and then Fed Ex it to the US... marked urgent. Subsonic low flying cruise missiles are much cheaper and easier to make than ICBMs and hidden on a container ship it could be launched mid atlantic off a container ship in the middle of the night and no one would have any idea what hit them.

    Even a nuclear powered and nuclear armed torpedo fired from the African coast with no impact fuse and set to run at 20knts at a depth that will prevent it hitting any ships and it can run for days or weeks and when it gets to a certain geographic location it can rise and navigate its way into a port and blow up the whole port... GPS is quite accurate around the US and at 20 knots speed civilian GPS signals would be accurate enough.
    avatar
    AMosienko

    Posts : 3
    Points : 4
    Join date : 2012-05-24
    Location : London, United Kingdom

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  AMosienko on Mon May 28, 2012 6:16 pm

    Europe is more concerned about Russia's nuclear weapons . It fully understands it doesn't have a chance against Russia's unconventional weapons.

    Austin

    Posts : 6233
    Points : 6639
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  Austin on Fri Jul 06, 2012 10:14 am

    Technical concerns: Why Russia worries about missile defense

    Firebird

    Posts : 945
    Points : 977
    Join date : 2011-10-14

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  Firebird on Fri Jul 06, 2012 4:53 pm

    The people that matter in Europe, don't have any problem with Russia. France, Italy, Germany and the rest. Its only American shit-stirrers that even want to think about this ABM crap.
    And Britain has as much to gain working WITH rather than against Russia.

    Putin needs to start talking about "protecting Cuba's sovereignty" and the like.
    ie Russian ABM and hypersonic planes based in Cuba. Might stop this idiotic American posturing for redneck (trailer trash) voters in Hicksville USA.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16302
    Points : 16933
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  GarryB on Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:06 pm

    And Britain has as much to gain working WITH rather than against Russia.

    But you can't tell them that... they seem to think Russia is a naughty little boy and needs democracy lessons from the west in general and the UK in particular.

    The UK is the rich kid growing up that had everything (like India) and Russia was the poor kid who didn't have anything. The UK was always scared Russia was going to pinch something... like India.
    It seems that India made friends with Russia because Russia didn't treat India like it was their parent.

    Even today Britain thinks its influence and effect on India and the rest of the world was largely positive... of course they never saw all the violence and brutality needed to force the natives into line.

    Of course most European naval countries did it too and probably think they spread civilisation to the world, when in most cases what they spread was destructive consumerism. They consider themselves culturally diverse because they eat curries and chinese food at their takeaways.

    To be honest I think Russia should trade with Europe, but not expect any real friendship... at least for a few generations to get their chips off their shoulders. There are plenty of countries around the world who would be interested in fair honest trade relations. Wouldn't expect too much from some countries under the western thumb like Australia or part of it like the UK, but asian countries, central and south american countries, and african countries will likely want a change from the west.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    flamming_python

    Posts : 3203
    Points : 3317
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Poland to host Aegis BMD

    Post  flamming_python on Tue Oct 23, 2012 1:56 am

    Man this is hilarious, when will these n00bs learn?  Very Happy

    http://rt.com/politics/poland-missile-defense-invest-791/

    New arms race? Poland to spend fortune on missile defense

    Warsaw plans to expend up to US$400 million on the creation of its missile defense system as Russia promises to deploy weapons close to Poland’s borders in response to the proposed American AMD shield.

    The US missile defense shield in Europe – which Russia sees as a threat to its national security – has been a bone of contention between Moscow and NATO. Washington claims there is no threat, but has refused to provide legally-binding guarantees that the system would not be used against Russia.

    Moscow underlined that, though it has every capability of adequately responding to the shield’s deployment, it would prefer Washington's plans to be reviewed. No matter what terms the American side uses, the missile defense plan "is still an element of an arms race," President Vladimir Putin said earlier.

    As part of the project, the US plans to station SM-3 missile interceptor site in Poland by 2018.

    Russia in response announced it would deploy Iskander missiles systems in its westernmost region Kaliningrad (bordering Poland and Lithuania) to counter the threat. Earlier this year, a top Russian military official also raised the possibility of a possible pre-emptive strike on the European missile system if the US refuses a dialogue.

    Warsaw considers the Russian move as “blackmailing which would have been impossible if Poland had powerful missile defense,” believes the head of the country’s National Security Bureau, General Koziej, reports Polish Gazeta Wyborcza paper.

    There is another reason behind Poland’s decision to develop its own shield: missile attack is the most likely military threat in the modern world. In addition, the possibility of a single ballistic blow – when it is difficult to identify the aggressor – is highly likely, the Polish Security Bureau head observed. A prompt reaction would be necessary in case of such a scenario, while NATO would take its time and think before providing help to its member-state.

    The preliminary concept of the project has already been developed, the paper writes. Under the plan, by 2023 Poland should be ready to repulse a missile attack against a group of its forces, cities or important facilities. Providing a shield for the whole territory of the country is not possible yet.

    The system will be mobile and it will be integrated in to NATO missile defense. The alliance will be able to use it in case of a serious crisis.
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5699
    Points : 5735
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  TR1 on Tue Oct 23, 2012 2:10 am

    "Earlier this year, a top Russian military official also raised the possibility of a possible pre-emptive strike on the European missile system if the US refuses a dialogue."


    Who writes this crap?

    Poland being someone elses bitch and a drama queen, what else is new?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16302
    Points : 16933
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  GarryB on Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:26 am

    I wouldn't have much confidence in SM-3 effectively countering Iskander let alone what they will have in service in 2018.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    flamming_python

    Posts : 3203
    Points : 3317
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  flamming_python on Thu Nov 08, 2012 9:14 am

    Speaking of which, what will Russia have in service in 2018? Any Iskander upgrade or replacement on the horizon? I love you
    avatar
    Sujoy

    Posts : 904
    Points : 1070
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  Sujoy on Thu Nov 08, 2012 10:05 am

    There is this $1.2 billion Iskander M upgradation program specifically designed to take out any missile shields in Europe. This allocation will ensure the speedy development of the R 500 Iskander K that will have a 2000km range.

    In it's current form neither SM 3 nor PAC 3 can intercept the Iskander M because the optically guided warhead,can be controlled by encrypted radio transmission, even those originating from UAVs and AWACs.

    avatar
    flamming_python

    Posts : 3203
    Points : 3317
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  flamming_python on Thu Nov 08, 2012 2:54 pm

    Sujoy wrote:There is this $1.2 billion Iskander M upgradation program specifically designed to take out any missile shields in Europe. This allocation will ensure the speedy development of the R 500 Iskander K that will have a 2000km range.

    In it's current form neither SM 3 nor PAC 3 can intercept the Iskander M because the optically guided warhead,can be controlled by encrypted radio transmission, even those originating from UAVs and AWACs.


    Iskander-K - isn't that just a cruise missile launch platform? What the hell is so special about that? They can be intercepted by any air defense system in contrast to the Iskander-M which is far more capable.
    avatar
    Sujoy

    Posts : 904
    Points : 1070
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  Sujoy on Thu Nov 08, 2012 4:41 pm

    flamming_python wrote:Iskander-K - isn't that just a cruise missile launch platform? What the hell is so special about that? They can be intercepted by any air defense system in contrast to the Iskander-M which is far more capable.

    Iskander-K is the latest variant in the Iskander series of missiles. The missile system is equipped with R-500 cruise missile. Compared to Iskander M that has a range of 400kms the Iskander K will have a range of 2000kms.

    In other words the Iskander K is an extended range version of the Iskander M . And No, they just cannot be intercepted by any air defense systems . After receiving the images of the target, the onboard computer of the missile locks onto the target with its sight and directs it towards the target at supersonic speed.The optical homing head can be controlled so if it senses an incoming interceptor it will turns at waypoints making it impossible for the interceptor missile to neutralize it .
    avatar
    flamming_python

    Posts : 3203
    Points : 3317
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  flamming_python on Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:21 pm

    Compared to Iskander M that has a range of 400kms the Iskander K will have a range of 2000kms.

    That's nice. Only problem is the missile getting there.

    In other words the Iskander K is an extended range version of the Iskander M . And No, they just cannot be intercepted by any air defense systems .

    Balloney - it's a cruise missile travelling at supersonic speeds; of course it can be intercepted. Iskander-M's whole selling point, the reason why its so feared - is because it's a ballistic missile (therefore travelling at high hypersonic speeds), and manuverable.
    avatar
    Sujoy

    Posts : 904
    Points : 1070
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  Sujoy on Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:51 pm

    flamming_python wrote:That's nice. Only problem is the missile getting there.

    Under what circumstances ?

    flamming_python wrote:Balloney - it's a cruise missile travelling at supersonic speeds; of course it can be intercepted. Iskander-M's whole selling point, the reason why its so feared - is because it's a ballistic missile (therefore travelling at high hypersonic speeds), and manuverable.

    Balloney is the suggestion that a cruise missile can be intercepted especially a barrage of such missiles. Reliance on land based SAM systems for terminal defence of target areas is an in-effective strategy as high performance SAMs with expensive high power-aperture radars are required, and even with mast mounted antennas to improve coverage the footprint is bounded by ranges of miles to at most tens of miles.

    Will the enemy know the the attack distribution of the Iskander K ?

    Will they have precise information of the launch site/s ?

    Will the enemy have a mechanism on board a ship / aircraft / vehicle that automatically shares information on the arriving threat and/or firing solutions ?

    In any period, not all attacking cruise missiles will be judged to be threats. Cruise missiles not projected to damage predesignated critical infrastructure targets are not considered to be a threat—even though they may land on friendly soil. The initial attack queue consists only of those missiles projected to hit critical infrastructure targets or the SAM sites. The rate at which the arrival rate queue is populated is therefore of paramount importance and not the rate at which the missiles are detected by the radars.

    As on this date even China , Japan , India , EU does not have such systems in place . And we are talking about Poland here .

    Mindstorm

    Posts : 771
    Points : 952
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  Mindstorm on Thu Nov 08, 2012 6:52 pm



    This allocation will ensure the speedy development of the R 500 Iskander K that will have a 2000km range.

    Some straight facts:

    1) The so called "Iskander-K" was a relatively simple validation test of a modular system, on the basis Iskander platform, foreseeing the substitution of the two Iskander-M with 6 domestic 3M54 Klub cruise missiles , even the conventional version of which show a range in excess of 2500 km and CEP inferior to three meters (it is practically a BGM-109 TLAM with much greater range, higher average speed , greater manoeuvrability and significantly higher precision).
    It could be done literally even tomorrow at morning......if was not for INF Treaty banning ground launched weapons of this category (representing obviously by far the most lethal and,potentially, quickly unbalancing offensive elements in this class).

    2) Also Iskander-M is mantained ,artificially, within the 500 km ballpark only to let it remain within INF's limits.

    3) NATO lack even the most distant and elementary guise of an advanced, organic ,multilayered IADS ; its capability to defend its most critical installations (moreover widely spread around the globe) from even only the most simple barrage attack employing stand-off ammunitions (for not even name the unique type of offensive weapons in this category available to Russian federation) is simply PATHETIC.

    Its architecture is obviously conceived for power projection over immensely inferior enemies (to increase aggressively its sphere of influence) aware that thermonuclear equilibrium element would avoid the chance of a conflict against any enemy so advanced to capitalize its frail structure.

    avatar
    Sujoy

    Posts : 904
    Points : 1070
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  Sujoy on Fri Nov 09, 2012 2:42 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:Some straight facts:

    1) The so called "Iskander-K" was a relatively simple validation test of a modular system, on the basis Iskander platform, foreseeing the substitution of the two Iskander-M with 6 domestic 3M54 Klub cruise missiles , even the conventional version of which show a range in excess of 2500 km and CEP inferior to three meters (it is practically a BGM-109 TLAM with much greater range, higher average speed , greater manoeuvrability and significantly higher precision).

    Mindstorm , sorry to bother you with a question . But why do they want to "substitute" the Iskander M , it's already a great missile ? The only concern I have is I still recon that the terminal homing phase of the Iskander does not have evasive manoeuvring capabilities, because these are all pre-programmed, and are not REACTIVE in real-time. Maybe I am wrong on this part .

    Regards,
    Sujoy

    Mindstorm

    Posts : 771
    Points : 952
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  Mindstorm on Fri Nov 09, 2012 8:03 pm


    Mindstorm , sorry to bother you with a question . But why do they want to "substitute" the Iskander M , it's already a great missile ?


    Probably i has been no clear enough, the so called Iskander-K is a MODULAR system , clear ?


    Practically it is possible to mount a module of 3 missiles in the place of each of the two ballistic missiles ; at example two divisions of Iskander-M fire its 48 balistic missiles (with mix unitary/penetrating and special radial submunition warheads) to destroy an important enemy airfield and a C4/radar installation within only few minutes.literally, and with almost assured target's neutralization ; at this point the launcheres and theirs reloading vehicles quickly disperse and masking/covering themselves (in civil tunnels, underground garages, between high buildings, military redeploying subways , covered hangars etc..etc...); all of that while the decoy vehicles do the same and under full cover of the whole IADS .

    30-35 minutes later the same vehicles, now armed with "Kaliber" cruise missiles are ready to destroy less critical or less defended targets with cruise missiles (288) ; this process can go over and over and over up to total obliteration of the enemy's most important assets.
    Image that you can realize now why ground based missiles systems in this class (it is moreover a sector where Russia enjoy a very wide technological advantage over any competitor worlwide) are limited by INF treaty at 500 km, it can literally reduce an entire military structure devoid of a powerful IADS to shreds in a matter of few hours even using only conventional warheads.



    The only concern I have is I still recon that the terminal homing phase of the Iskander does not have evasive manoeuvring capabilities, because these are all pre-programmed, and are not REACTIVE in real-time. Maybe I am wrong on this part .


    If you remeber i already gave a response in the Iskander thread to this authenticate non-sense Laughing Laughing (if i am no wrong ,you had heard this idiocy from a marketing representative of Barak-8 at an exposition).

    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 811
    Points : 1310
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  nemrod on Sat Feb 16, 2013 6:29 pm


    Report casts doubt on US missile shield in Europe protecting America

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/apnewsbreak-report-casts-doubt-on-missile-shield-in-europe-protecting-america/2013/02/09/6e0c2820-7291-11e2-b3f3-b263d708ca37_story.html

    I think, they cannot afford to maintain their pressure against Russia.
    America is in Bankrupcy. Let's add this info

    http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=303430
    It demonstrates that, we are reaching a turning point, a shift in international area.
    Moreover, I suspect that, this shield, was only a pressure against Russia in the goal of Kremlin's help in Iran's nuclear standoff.
    As USA is going to admit a nuclear Iran, and leaving Israel, this shield is becoming useless, if not embarrassing.


    Austin

    Posts : 6233
    Points : 6639
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  Austin on Sat Mar 16, 2013 5:53 am

    US Cancels 3rd Stage ABM Program in Europe , A precursor to further reduction in Nuclear Weapons between US and Russia as Obama has promised for second term , This should also put to rest on some ruffling feathers at Kremlin on 3rd stage Europen ABM Program

    US scraps final phase of European missile shield

    The Pentagon announced Friday it will spend $1 billion to add 14 interceptors to a West Coast-based missile defense system, responding to what it called faster-than-anticipated North Korean progress on nuclear weapons and missiles. Defense officials confirm the move, saying it's in response to recent threats from North Korea to attack the U.S. with nuclear weapons.

    A portion of the $1 billion cost of the expanded system will come from scrapping the final phase of a missile defense system the U.S. is building in Europe.

    The system in Europe is aimed mainly at defending against a missile threat from Iran; key elements of that system are already in place.

    The decision to drop the planned expansion in Europe happens to coincide with President Barack Obama’s 's announced intention to engage Russia in talks about further reducing each country's nuclear weapons arsenal.

    US to add 14 interceptors on the West Coast in response to recent threats from North Korea

    The Pentagon announced Friday it will spend $1 billion to add 14 interceptors to a West Coast-based missile defense system, responding to what it called faster-than-anticipated North Korean progress on nuclear weapons and missiles.

    Defense officials confirm the move, saying it's in response to recent threats from North Korea to attack the U.S. with nuclear weapons. U.S. officials believe North Korea is incapable of carrying out an attack, but the threat adds to tension between the two countries.

    The Pentagon intends to add the 14 interceptors to 26 already in place at Fort Greely, Alaska. That will expand the system's ability to shoot down long-range missiles in flight before they could reach U.S. territory. In addition to those at Greely, the U.S. also has four missile interceptors at Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif.

    The officials confirmed the decision on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it publicly.
    avatar
    Sujoy

    Posts : 904
    Points : 1070
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  Sujoy on Sat Mar 16, 2013 3:16 pm

    Good decision .... but let's remember that the "threat" over Russia has not disappeared completely .

    It has just shifted from the European part of Russia to the Asian part of Russia .

    This "change of heart" on the part of the US is part of it's PIVOT IN ASIA policy which basically is a misnomer for containing the rise of CHINA in the short to medium term and INDIA in the long term .

    The US is setting up a state of the art radar system in Japan which apparently is supposed to track Ballistic Missile launches in North Korea . This apart from the ECHELON in Australia and similar SIGINT systems in other parts of SE Asia will help the US to keep a hawk eye on CHINA's every move.

    The US has scrapped the 3rd Stage ABM Program in Europe primarily because it is short of fund as it needs fund to bolster it's defense against CHINA .

    The US Secretary of State in his very first visit to Europe earlier this month has by and large indicated that the US military involvement in Europe (as we knew it after the end of WW II) is virtually over and that Europe needs to fend for itself militarily.
    avatar
    gaurav

    Posts : 329
    Points : 329
    Join date : 2013-02-19
    Age : 37
    Location : Blr

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  gaurav on Sat Mar 16, 2013 5:35 pm

    Austin wrote:US Cancels 3rd Stage ABM Program in Europe , A precursor to further
    reduction in Nuclear Weapons between US and Russia as Obama has promised for second
    term , This should also put to rest on some ruffling feathers at Kremlin on 3rd
    stage Europen ABM Program
    Good move by U.S.
    With Kerry and Hagel at the top it is expected U.S will take similar measures
    to further reduce nuke stockpiles of U.S and Russsia.
    avatar
    Viktor

    Posts : 5672
    Points : 6321
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  Viktor on Sun Mar 17, 2013 12:28 am

    Those plans will be reactivated if they found money to do it.

    Of course this situation is not bad for US also as they have been warning Europe to participate in its defense more and more repeatedly.

    Of course this could be Russia opportunity to push its own agenda and try to reach a agreement with EU about missile defense or

    possibly developed it together based on S-500 and S-300V4.

    Mindstorm

    Posts : 771
    Points : 952
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  Mindstorm on Sun Mar 17, 2013 1:58 pm


    US Cancels 3rd Stage ABM Program in Europe , A precursor to further reduction in Nuclear Weapons between US and Russia as Obama has promised for second term , This should also put to rest on some ruffling feathers at Kremlin on 3rd stage Europen ABM Program



    Very Happy Worst covered strategic posture trap of entire military history.

    - NATO naive plan -

    Offer as "bait" a momentary freezing of last stage of East European ABM structure (aimed at find some type of strategic response to the enormous problem represented today by Topol-M and Yars ICBM Wink ), not offering moreover any type of legally binding guarantee on a possible future quick resuming of the plan (when the ABM technological basis will be, for US's scientific sector of the field, more solid) hoping to lure Federation in:


    1) Accepting a further strategic missile reduction bilateral Treaty (essential in "diluting" to the maximum the wide technological edge enjoyed by Russian Federation in ballistic missile technology and catch it in a true strategic bottle-neck, very difficult to overcome in the short period, when the last stage of ABM structure in Europe will be suddenly resumed).

    2) Relax R&D efforts and production plans for the perspective ballistic missiles programs under a momentary illusion of safety.

    3) Reduce number and operational deployment of sub-strategic nuclear weapons (and stop theirs modernization plan).

    4) Slow-down the development plans for perspective Air and Space Defensive systems (hoping ,so, also to obtaining a true offensive "capability surprise" with theirs future suborbital hypersonic global strike system Laughing Laughing ).



    Simply Ridiculous.



    Sponsored content

    Re: NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe and Russia's response

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat Aug 19, 2017 1:08 pm