Europe News
Jun 2, 2007, 12:35 GMT
Putin says Russia "has to react" to US missile shield in Europe
And Also
Latest Headlines in Europe
- 1. Bulgarian parliament passes budget to balance books
- 2. PREVIEW: Deportivo next target for rampant Barcelona
- 3. Win in Xerez gives Barcelona five-point lead over Real Madrid
- 4. Brazil's President Lula in Ukraine for talks on aerospace, trade
- 5. Calls for economic protests follow Swiss minaret vote
Older Talkback
The Cuban Crisis comes to mind.. Missiles on peoples doorsteps and stuff like that.. but that was different of course.. yeah.. right.
Prophetically it is all falling into place.. but hey its a lovely day lets all go fishing while we can after all Vietnam was wrong, Iraq was/is wrong so with this they gets to score three out of three... and deeper in debt.. happy days!
@Joe the idiot in CA
'Wait, when has the US ever been attacked? Are you refering to 9/11, because if I remember correctly, that was an independent terrorist attack that had absolutely nothing to do with Iraq. '
So there are no Al Queda fighting us in Iraq, eh? You idiot.
'So how many times are we going to one-up 9/11? '
Zero, we haven't flown any aircraft full of people into buildings full of people, idiot.
'Why does the solution have to lie in lashing out at other countries that we 'think' might be 'plotting against us?''
Not an answer to his/her question, idiot.
Idiots like you who have been chipping away at our resolve would have railed against any plans at preparedness as 'fear mongering', idiot.
'We got love videos from Osama way in advance. '
So what? Idiot?
' Bush and his administration KNEW. '
Knew what? idiot. That 19 hijackers were going to fly aircraft full of people into buildings full of people? Idiot? No they didn't know that, idiot.
'Yet nothing was done.'
So we should have done what? Closed down all the airports, seaports, schools and highways, put a 24 hour curfew on and had everyone go to shelters? Idiot? Did I mention that you are an idiot? A conspiracist idiot? Who bought you your computer idiot?
't is conspiracy theory to believe that perhaps the administration waited for such an attack ON PURPOSE so as to have this carte blanche to 'pre-emptively' attack any country of our choice.'
YES, idiot. It is, idiot. It also does not make any sense, idiot.
'The fact of the matter is, we SHOULD HAVE BEEN READY.'
How? Idiot? How do you prepare for every weakness that a terrorist wants to exploit? Obviously you can not, idiot.
'What about MY questions? '
They are the idiotic questions of a paranoid mind, idiot.
'Where was NORAD? '
Norad looks out, not in idiot.
' Where were our planes? '
Do you just hop in a fighter jet and turn the key and go? Idiot? No you do not... Idiot.
'Why didn't Bush do anything after he was told of the first crash?'
What did you want him to do you lunatic?
'Deliberate stand-down.
'
Bull, you idiot.
People like you, who are so unbelievably stupid and so unbelievably mailable and who are such complete IDIOTS make me sick.
When people have nothing worth saying they have to resort to calling others names!!!
I don't understand why the combined forces of the EU don't make a stand. Are they that afraid of putin? Is it putins oil that is owning the EU? The EU is full of itself that it can't or won't do anything but talk, talk, talk and soon may talk itself out of existance.
Henry Obering must think Putin is stupid,
When makes the claim that that Iran's missile's could threaten the U.S.in 3to 8 years,
Also the Poles should ask themselves,where they will get their oil and gas from if they station these missles on polish territory
Russia is within its rights to link its energy to its security considerations.
(Watch this get the egomaniac calling everyone else 'idiots' get bent out of shape ... if it's who I have in mind, he's getting over a broken leg, and while I wish him a speedy recovery, it's left him with his foot in his mouth)
***
This is very personal with Putin, just as Saddam was very personal for Bush and Cheney. Putin's background is the Stasi, and cooperation with the KGB. Related 'pastes' from other Web articles:
---
(Washington Post in 2000)
Putin defends the Soviet-era intelligence service to this day. In recent comments to a writers' group in Moscow, he even seemed to excuse its role in dictator Joseph Stalin's brutal purges, saying it would be 'insincere' for him to assail the agency where he worked for so many years. Fiercely patriotic, Putin once said he could not read a book by a Soviet defector because 'I don't read books by people who have betrayed the Motherland.'
---
(more recent)
Putin feels he offered friendship to the West after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the U.S. only to be abused in return, said Nina Khrushcheva, an analyst at the World Policy Institute housed at the New School in New York and the granddaughter of former Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev.
'He truly feels the West betrayed him,' she said, because of the continued expansion of NATO, and alleged American and EU support for nonviolent revolutions in Georgia and Ukraine that led to the election of leaders friendly to the West. Western criticism of Moscow's record on human rights and democracy, in the view of Russia's leaders, only adds insult to injury.
More broadly, Putin has repeatedly expressed frustration with the political and economic consensus among the major world powers, represented by groups such as the EU and the G-8, which have relied on the military might of the U.S. to guarantee security.
The question coming up is who will follow Putin as President, just as we face our own elections in 2008. Of course, Russian elections are for show, but the issue of a successor is critical; just as it will be when Musharraf leaves office, or Karzai. There's no guarantee that who follows won't be worse for the U.S., a lesson that should have been learned already in other countries. We supported Saddam all those many years for a reason.
Check this article:
Putin heirs apparent
ESTANISLAO OZIEWICZ
Globe and Mail Update
June 2, 2007 at 12:01 AM EDT
Speculation in Russia is rampant about who may succeed Vladimir Putin as president next year.
Mr. Putin has said that he will make his own choice known during the presidential campaign in early 2008. The two names most often mentioned in Russia and abroad are two of his closest colleagues, first deputy prime ministers Sergei Ivanov and Dmitri Medvedev. But Timothy Colton, director of Harvard's Davis Center for Russian and Eurasion Studies, said recently that all kinds of Kremlin names are being bandied about and that the eventual successor may come out of the blue.
“All this is keeping in mind that in 1999 [former president Boris] Yeltsin surprised us by picking Putin as his successor, and so there is the precedent, and he's certainly going to have a very good chance of imposing whomever he wants,” Mr. Colton said in an interview with the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations.
Russian deputy prime ministers Sergei Ivanov, left, and Dmitri Medvedev, are both potential candidates to succeed President Vladimir Putin. “He simply hasn't tipped his hand yet.”
The question regarding system’s current capability is not an issue here. Instead the issue is whether those capabilities will improve in the future. Without of doubt they will. By that time, however, US will have the necessary foothold very close to Russian borders. This puts this new cold war wrangling in perspective. US wants a foothold; Russia knows if they give an inch, US will take a yard.
As far as rogue states go, I cannot see why would N.Korea make it so difficult for themselves to send their missiles the long way around the globe. Why not put the radar in Hawaii?
Has this happen before?
Yes. Popular history at length chews on the Cuban missile crisis, but the precursor to the stand off between US and USSR usually goes unmentioned.
“In 1961 the U.S. started deploying 15 Jupiter IRBM (intermediate-range ballistic missiles) nuclear missiles near Ýzmir, Turkey, which directly threatened cities in the western sections of the Soviet Union, including Moscow through its 1500 mile range and flight time of about 16 minutes. These missiles were regarded by President Kennedy as being of questionable strategic value; an SSBN (ballistic submarine) was capable of providing the same coverage, with both stealth and superior firepower.
Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev had publicly expressed his anger at the Turkish deployment, and regarded the missiles as a personal affront. The deployment of missiles in Cuba — the first time Soviet missiles were moved outside the USSR — is commonly seen as Khrushchev's direct response to the Turkish missiles.”
Source Wikipedia, Cuban Missile Crisis.
What should we expect?
As of late US has been apprehensive about Putin induced changes in Russia. The young democratic institutions of Russia are being strangled, but Putin’s approval rating is at an all time high. Some say it’s because the people of Russia are better off economically and care not for the democracy. Others attribute Putin’s popularity to feeding the people’s imperialist aspirations. No doubt these are contributing factors, but what about unilateral US foreign policy? Does anyone think they are safe from the wrath of the only Superpower left? It seems only nuclear nations who are capable of delivering warheads anywhere on Earth could feel more or less safe. Russia is among these states and certainly does not want to lose its deterrent.
Russia will be electing a new president in 2008. If this stand off escalates any further, Putin’s successor will not be able to do what Khruschev did. But he will be able to kick off another arm’s race. A race in which the sheer destructive power not precision will be the goal. Alas, the fuse will become short again.
The question regarding system’s current capability is not an issue here. Instead the issue is whether those capabilities will improve in the future. Without of doubt they will. By that time, however, US will have the necessary foothold very close to Russian borders. This puts this new cold war wrangling in perspective. US wants a foothold; Russia knows if they give an inch, US will take a yard.
As far as rogue states go, I cannot see why would N.Korea make it so difficult for themselves to send their missiles the long way around the globe. Why not put the radar in Hawaii?
Has this happen before?
Yes. Popular history at length chews on the Cuban missile crisis, but the precursor to the stand off between US and USSR usually goes unmentioned.
“In 1961 the U.S. started deploying 15 Jupiter IRBM (intermediate-range ballistic missiles) nuclear missiles near Ýzmir, Turkey, which directly threatened cities in the western sections of the Soviet Union, including Moscow through its 1500 mile range and flight time of about 16 minutes. These missiles were regarded by President Kennedy as being of questionable strategic value; an SSBN (ballistic submarine) was capable of providing the same coverage, with both stealth and superior firepower.
Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev had publicly expressed his anger at the Turkish deployment, and regarded the missiles as a personal affront. The deployment of missiles in Cuba — the first time Soviet missiles were moved outside the USSR — is commonly seen as Khrushchev's direct response to the Turkish missiles.”
Source Wikipedia, Cuban Missile Crisis.
What should we expect?
As of late US has been apprehensive about Putin induced changes in Russia. The young democratic institutions of Russia are being strangled, but Putin’s approval rating is at an all time high. Some say it’s because the people of Russia are better off economically and care not for the democracy. Others attribute Putin’s popularity to feeding the people’s imperialist aspirations. No doubt these are contributing factors, but what about unilateral US foreign policy? Does anyone think they are safe from the wrath of the only Superpower left? It seems only nuclear nations who are capable of delivering warheads anywhere on Earth could feel more or less safe. Russia is among these states and certainly does not want to lose its deterrent.
Russia will be electing a new president in 2008. If this stand off escalates any further, Putin’s successor will not be able to do what Khruschev did. But he will be able to kick off another arm’s race. A race in which the sheer destructive power not precision will be the goal. Alas, the fuse will become short again.
The problem with anti-missile defense is that the U.S. is not omnipitent. Russia's new oil wealth has given the capability to offset, through sheer number of warheads, if not technology itself. With MIRV (multiple independent warheads), it requires our knocking out an offensive missile at or near launch. Iran does not have the capability to launch multiple missles, nor do terrorists; but Russia does.
The proximity of Bush's proposed defensive missiles to Russia is the problem - lot of the Old Guard don't trust Bush and Cheney. The promimity is the key to attacking an offensive launch early, so Putin is concerned. Ours are NOT offensive weapons, and Putin understands that full well. It's the old 'balance of power' theory at work, so Putin feels the need to respond.
Out dealings with North Korea and Iran has caused similar reactions, and Iran's combination of nationalism and Islamic fundamentalist is unique - Russia is nationalistic, but religion does not enter into it.
Sec'y. Rice has enough education to understand this, but is stuck constantly having to mitigate Bush's policies, and Cheney's bellicose rants. Not an enviable position.
Washington Post 5/31 (excerpt)
Rice, in her speech, asserted: 'We find Russia's recent missile diplomacy difficult to understand, and we regret Russia's reluctance to accept the partnership in missile defense that we have offered.'
'There is no need to fear Russia's actions; they are not aggressive,' Putin said. 'They are a mere response to harsh and groundless unilateral actions by our partners and are aimed at maintaining the balance of forces in the world.'
The disputes between Russia and the United States have colored other diplomatic efforts, such as concerns over Iran's nuclear program and the future of Kosovo.
Gulf News (excerpt)
Madrid: The US is not preparing for war against Iran and Vice-President Dick Cheney supports that policy, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice says, taking a swipe at a UN official who says he is worried about 'crazies' who want to start bombing.
'The president of the United States has made very clear what our policy is. That policy is supported by all the members of his Cabinet and by the vice- president of the United States,' Rice said on Friday.
'The president has made clear that we are on a diplomatic course,' she said in regard to US opposition to Iran's nuclear ambitions.
M&C story: BACKGROUND: Missile defence for Europe faces technical challenges
(More non-scientific crap from the Administration, and no doubt not helping with the G-8 talks, either. Bush seems to have no idea of what works, and what does not).
----
Washington - The United States is forging ahead on fielding a long-range missile defence system in Eastern Europe despite concerns that the shield still faces considerable technological hurdles and has not been tested under realistic scenarios.
The controversial plan to deploy 10 interceptor missiles to Poland and a radar site to the Czech Republic has been greeted with unease in Europe and outright hostility in Russia, and Bush is meeting with Czech leaders on Tuesday and Polish leaders on Friday to discuss the issue.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO), Congress' investigative arm, said in a March report that Ground Based Midcourse is still largely unproven despite scoring a successful hit in a September 2006 test.
'There is still a ways to go to demonstrate whether the capability is reliable enough,' Paul Francis, primary author of the GAO report, said in an interview.
The GAO and missile defence critics, including Philip Coyle, who headed the Pentagon's independent weapons testing office during the 1990s, say testing has not been realistic.
The target missile in September's test did not release countermeasures like balloons or chaff, which are used to confuse the missile defence system's tracking radar, Coyle said.
'They have done these tests under scripted conditions, where you have information in advance that no enemy would give you,' said Coyle, now an analyst with the Centre for Defence Information in Washington.
Peace threw Superior fire power.
(This is Putin jockeying for influence at the upcoming G8 - note how calmly he makes these threats, to pressure countries who count on Russia for natural gas)
'Putin warns he will point missiles at Europe'
ROME (Reuters) - Russia will once again aim its missiles at targets in Europe if U.S. plans to build a missile defence shield near Russia's borders go ahead, President Vladimir Putin was quoted as saying on Sunday.
In an interview reported in Italy's Corriere della Sera, Putin acknowledged Russia's response risked restarting an arms race but he said Moscow would not be responsible for the consequences because Washington had started it.
Putin made the tough statement days before a Group of Eight summit in Germany on June 6 where, among other world leaders, he will come face to face with U.S. President George W. Bush.
Russia has not expressly targeted its missiles at Europe since the end of the Cold War but, asked if it would do this again if the U.S. missile shield plant went ahead, Putin said: 'Yes, naturally.'
'If the American nuclear capability widens across European territory, we will have to give ourselves new targets in Europe,' Italy's leading daily quoted Putin as saying.
America installs 'X' number of anti-missiles and announces the fact.
Russia fires 'X+n' missiles. How many reach america ?
For 'n' read nuclear bangs on american soil (or slightly higher - for more effect)
Bush ---> take your bulls and go to hell
RE:
America installs 'X' number of anti-missiles and announces the fact.
Russia fires 'X+n' missiles. How many reach america ?
For 'n' read nuclear bangs on american soil (or slightly higher - for more effect)
----------
That's not Putin's threat - he is putting pressure on Europe for allowing these ineffective missiles to be placed close to Russia's border. He's not interested in threatening American soil. Russia already has thousands of warheads that can reach the U.S., but now has demonstrated superior missile technology formerly under wraps - a wakeup call for Bush and his missile-defense strategy. This longer-term risk is a cold-war-type revival, since both sides simply choose to escalate. Putin's energy revenues have enabled this kind of investment, and Russia is a main supplier of natural gas to Europe.
This is the same technique that Iran is using by declaring that they're moving ahead with nuclear energy - they're in a good position, now that Bush has removed Saddam, who had offset Iranian hegemony attempts for 25 years, and Iraq continues without an effective government.
Why would you build nuclear weapons and missles? To use them. If you are not going to use them, destroy them, all across the world! If you dont want to destroy them, then lets use them. Its now or later. Lets just go ahead now and start a nuclear war. Isnt that what everyone is preparing for? Its going to happen one day so why not go ahead and start now?
Lets go nuclear!!!
I almost have to agree with YoYo, and if this crazy build-up of nuclear arms around the world wasn't so serious, it would almost be laughable.
Just a few years of neo-con (con stands here for 'to con someone') rule and the whole middle east gets destabilized and the entire post-cold war progess gets flushed down the toilet in the last months of Bush rule.
It seems they have a screw up to-do list or something to push through before they get kicked out of office by the american voters.
Now , please americans vote another neo-con at next election and they will protect you sooo much from all the threats that they themselves created that the whole world will go up in mushroom clouds.
- Taliban ( Brought into power by u.s republican governments)
- Bin Laden (Not so long ago supported by the CIA)
And now ...prepare yourself for the new threat america !
Vladimir Putin !
Why didnt know he is a threat ?
Because he wasnt until neo-con America started that missile shield plan
Strange huh ? Enemies coming from Bush's manufacturing band....
As predicted, Russia is useing its oil to force Europeans to bow down to Putins Russia. Russian assasination squads are all over Europe and doeing Putins bidding, Now Putin is threatening Europe once again with nukes. How will Europe respond? The won't they will bow even lower and capitulate to Russia's demands. Just wait for Putins new upcoming replacement to come into office and then Putin will really turn up the heat on Europe.
Your Talkback on this Story