Czechs and Poles, what do you think of the Anti Missile System?

[mkloby]

Gents - the weapons involved in the anti-missile system are completely different from the nuclear missiles that were present in Cuba. The missiles in Poland won't be capable of destroying Russian cities and wreaking havoc. Why are you trying to make a comparison between the two???

 

[Freebird]

Gents - the weapons involved in the anti-missile system are completely different from the nuclear missiles that were present in Cuba. The missiles in Poland won't be capable of destroying Russian cities and wreaking havoc. Why are you trying to make a comparison between the two???

Russia has only the word of the US government on the capabilities, why should they trust us?

You didn't answer my earlier question

If Russia asks to inspect these missile systems in Poland, do we allow it?

If they are actually what we say they are, what is the problem?
If we refuse to allow them access, what are we hiding?

Just curious as to your opinion on this

 

[JugBR]

mkloby, the nuclear missiles are in turkey, isnt that correct ?

 

[mkloby]

Russia has only the word of the US government on the capabilities, why should they trust us?

You didn't answer my earlier question

If Russia asks to inspect these missile systems in Poland, do we allow it?

If they are actually what we say they are, what is the problem?
If we refuse to allow them access, what are we hiding?

Just curious as to your opinion on this

My apologies - that one slipped by.
Regarding the inspection of such weapons - there are a couple inherent problems. First of all - Russia has no right to inspect the defenses of another state. Should they be allowed to inspect any and everything they wish? How about they be allowed to inspect other types of weapon systems.

More importantly, however, is security implications involved in allowing such inspections. Say for example, the missile system and TTPs for deployment are set at Cosmic Top Secret - are you seriously suggesting outsiders be allowed to mull about and inspect? That's just foolish and not militarily sound.

mkloby, the nuclear missiles are in turkey, isnt that correct ?

What nuclear missiles?

 

[Freebird]

mkloby, the nuclear missiles are in turkey, isnt that correct ?

The nuclear missiles were removed from Turkey as part of the "Cuban Missile crisis"

Google "Cuba, Crisis, missiles, Turkey"

Three months after the Cuban Missile Crisis the United States secretly removed all its nuclear missiles from Turkey and Italy.

 

[Matt308]

Wait, wait, wait. Timeout.

The US specifically asked Russia to be involved in the missile defense system. They were not only asked to inspect the system, but to help staff the missile command, and were also asked to network in their over horizon X-band radar.

 

[Matt308]

Now if by inspect, you mean allow for inspection of technical documents, then hell no. But a simple inspection of a missile, its payload and propulsion system would allow a simpleton to understand that they are defensive in nature. To argue otherwise is pure fantasy. It would be much easier to field an offensive capability in the form of cruise missiles.

 

[Freebird]

Now if by inspect, you mean allow for inspection of technical documents, then hell no. But a simple inspection of a missile, its payload and propulsion system would allow a simpleton to understand that they are defensive in nature. To argue otherwise is pure fantasy. It would be much easier to field an offensive capability in the form of cruise missiles.

That is a very interesting twist indeed Matt.

Do you think that this missile system in Poland is a good idea?

Is the attitude of Russia a concern?

 

[ROMERO]

The question all this in need. There is need to install such a system of missile defence and counter to Russia who feel threatened? the answer is no. NATO is the most powerful military organization in the world, and would force to respond to an alleged missile attack by Iran. Not to mention American fleet in the Mediterranean that has certainly interceptadores missiles.
I believe that the United States should seek a partner in russia, and address the issue differently. Peace is made with attitudes peaceful, with no exchange of harsh words.

The russia had no attitude that is justified isso.Deve to have balance and common sense ...

 

[JugBR]

The nuclear missiles were removed from Turkey as part of the "Cuban Missile crisis"

Google "Cuba, Crisis, missiles, Turkey"

Three months after the Cuban Missile Crisis the United States secretly removed all its nuclear missiles from Turkey and Italy.

thats why i didnt knew dammit !!!

 

[Ramirezzz]

Wait, wait, wait. Timeout.

The US specifically asked Russia to be involved in the missile defense system. They were not only asked to inspect the system, but to help staff the missile command, and were also asked to network in their over horizon X-band radar.

well Russia asked the US to use its radar in Azerbajdzhan too :

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/05/world/europe/05missile.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

 

[Freebird]

I love the fact that this thread proves how people do not read. The Poll specifically says that only Czechs and Polish members can vote in the thread.

Yet somehow a German (Airfix), South African (Henk), Russian (Mitya), Mexican (smg) and an American (fly boy) have managed to vote in the poll. Way to go guys!

Adler, Ignorance is Bliss...

What is the minimum % of Czech/Pole required to vote?


I'm drinking Czech beer and eating Polish sausage Perogies, I figure that my total mass is over 10% Czech/Polish by this point in the evening.

Can I vote now?

Please hurry up and let me know, before I have to take a leak....

 

[mkloby]

The question all this in need. There is need to install such a system of missile defence and counter to Russia who feel threatened? the answer is no. NATO is the most powerful military organization in the world, and would force to respond to an alleged missile attack by Iran. Not to mention American fleet in the Mediterranean that has certainly interceptadores missiles.
I believe that the United States should seek a partner in russia, and address the issue differently. Peace is made with attitudes peaceful, with no exchange of harsh words.

The russia had no attitude that is justified isso.Deve to have balance and common sense ...

I'm not sure what your post means - but NATO having the conventional military mass to respond conventionally by invading Iran in the incident of a missile launch provides no defense against the missile attack itself.

So I'll ask - how is it a bad thing for a missile system that can protect against incoming hostile missiles a provocative and foolish system to install? Why would Russia possibly be threatened by this? Explain to me the rational aside from the "How is Russia going to know they're not offensive missiles."

 

[seesul]

I'm drinking Czech beer and eating Polish sausage Perogies, I figure that my total mass is over 10% Czech/Polish by this point in the evening.
Can I vote now?
Please hurry up and let me know, before I have to take a leak....

You got my permission
Which kind of beer do you drink there?

 

[JugBR]

I'm not sure what your post means

let me "translate" to you. romero used google translator because he dont have a good english. me either, but i wont die hungry if you leave me in times square with 5000 dollars. ate least not in the first month...

The question is all about of "do we really need this?". was needed to install this system and make russia feel threatened ? the answer is no. NATO is the most powerfull military alliance in the world. and would have the meanings to respons an missile attack by iran. and also american fleet in mediterranean have interceptor missiles.

i believe usa should seek a partner in russia and address the issue diferently. peace is made with peacefull attitudes, not exachanging harsh words.

russia didnt anything to justifies this harsh words exchanging. solution cames from balance and common sense.

and i agree with romero in almost he said. just dont know about the us fleet in mediterranean, but the rest is ok.

but NATO having the conventional military mass to respond conventionally by invading Iran in the incident of a missile launch provides no defense against the missile attack itself.

So I'll ask - how is it a bad thing for a missile system that can protect against incoming hostile missiles a provocative and foolish system to install? Why would Russia possibly be threatened by this? Explain to me the rational aside from the "How is Russia going to know they're not offensive missiles."

well mkloby, lets remember the iranian missile cant reach europe. it just could reach israel, in theory. also that missile have been proving to be a hoax, since the launch test was photoshoped.

another interesting point is: since czech are not nato partners, why dont pass to them the project and let them build the missile if they want ? because the czech republic is a very industrial country. they can do that themselves. if russia complains them, would be a matter of sovereign, because russia would been complaining of czech rep. builds a czech missile in czech land.

 

[Freebird]

You got my permission
Which kind of beer do you drink there?

Thanks!

We got some Staropramen here, besides Pils it's hard to find any others.

Have you ever tried beer from Ukraine?

 

[Freebird]

I'm not sure what your post means - but NATO having the conventional military mass to respond conventionally by invading Iran in the incident of a missile launch provides no defense against the missile attack itself.

So I'll ask - how is it a bad thing for a missile system that can protect against incoming hostile missiles a provocative and foolish system to install? Why would Russia possibly be threatened by this? Explain to me the rational aside from the "How is Russia going to know they're not offensive missiles."

It's seen as humiliation to Russia to have this system right up against it's borders. You may discount it, but political diplomatic consideratios play into these equasions too.

The Allies didn't put Hirohito on trial after WWII to avoid humiliating Japan {even though he was clearly guilty}


Why couldn't the missile system be put in Austria or Italy or Greece, especially as missiles from hostile nations {Iran, Syria ect} would be coming from the SouthEast

MKloby, don't get me wrong, I'm not a missile expert, and I'm not saying that this is a mistake. All I'm saying is that this will be seen as provocation by Russia, there will very likely be repercussions

 

[seesul]

Thanks!

We got some Staropramen here, besides Pils it's hard to find any others.

Have you ever tried beer from Ukraine?

not yet, only vodka with 90% of alcohol...for a first and last time
And BTW, Staropramen is actually my favourite beer...
So one point more 4 U

 

[seesul]

another interesting point is: since czech are not nato partners, why dont pass to them the project and let them build the missile if they want ? because the czech republic is a very industrial country. they can do that themselves. if russia complains them, would be a matter of sovereign, because russia would been complaining of czech rep. builds a czech missile in czech land.

Czech Republic is a NATO partner since March 12,1999
NATO has added new members six times since first forming in 1949. NATO is comprised of twenty-six members: Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
NATO - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[seesul]

well mkloby, lets remember the iranian missile cant reach europe. it just could reach israel, in theory. also that missile have been proving to be a hoax, since the launch test was photoshoped.

I´d like to believe it was photoshoped. But I would´t play with Shabab 4, that could reach Europe. Shahab-4
Complete overview of Iranian misilles is here Iran Missiles