Washington plays Russian roulette with missile defense - Polidicks

Of course, imagine the reverse situation, where Russia put missile batteries close to the US border. Like in Cuba, for example. I could imagine the US getting upset at that.

[QUOTE=TheDecryptor;43321184]Of course, imagine the reverse situation, where Russia put missile batteries close to the US border. [B]Like in Cuba, for example.[/B] I could imagine the US getting upset at that.[/QUOTE] These were actual missiles and not anti-missile missiles, but the point of tipping the balance still stands.

My favorite kind of roulette.

[QUOTE=Nannak;43320935]First of all it's from RT where should stop reading at and also let's look at the person who wrote the article: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F._William_Engdahl[/url] Especially his Bibliography It's very apparent that he's a conspiracy theorist which RT likes to employ to spew anything against the west and also CTs keep playing on Apocalyptic narratives as well which is a common pattern. In short stop wasting your time with fear mongering.[/QUOTE] IIRC RT is straight up banned from Wikipedia for being full of shit so I didn't take this article very seriously to begin with.

It is an editorial and holds no value as a reliable news source but still the point stands. It is political dick waving, where both sides know the other will not back down.

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;43321946]IIRC RT is straight up banned from Wikipedia for being full of shit so I didn't take this article very seriously to begin with.[/QUOTE] Uh nothing is banned from wikipedia.

[QUOTE=laserguided;43321968]Uh nothing is banned from wikipedia.[/QUOTE] I was remembering incorrectly on both accounts; there's a page that identifies unreliable sources, which users are discouraged from using but are not banned, and RT is not on it even though I could have sworn it was.

RT [i]lies so fucking much it's unbelievable[/i]. They are sometimes a good source, but if theres any way to spin the story to make Russia look good, you can guarantee they'll do it, even if it means outright fabricating bullshit. 2 incidents spring to mind. When there was a big hubbub about Russia sending attack helicopters to the Syrian government, they put out an article about it that had the line "[i]blahblahblah[/i] the NATO/UN/Whatever report stated that Russia was sending Syria Mi-35 helicopters, but such a helicopter does not even exist haha silly americans!!!!". [b]The Mi-35 is the export name for the Mi-24, and does indeed exist.[/b] A second one happened quite recently, they put out an article about "20 things you didnt know about Kalashnikov" or something along those lines. In that article there was a line something to the tune of "People loved minting coins commemorating the AK47 [i]so fucking much[/i] that even the super peaceful heavenly beautiful country of New Zealand minted a coin :D" [b]This is objectively not true.[/b] I am born and raised in New Zealand, and I have never heard of such a coin. The only references I can find to New Zealand having minted a coin, is some vague references to the Cook Islands having an AK47 commemorative coin. The Cook Islands happen to use NZD as a currency, but they also issue their own coins and banknotes. Thats where the connection ends. [b]TL;DR RT are full of shit most of the time. Take every article they write with a grain of salt[/b]

[QUOTE=darunner;43315227]I like how missiles that can only be used to shoot down an incoming missile threaten Russian national security. It basically implies that he intends to invade Poland.[/QUOTE] It neutralizes the concept of MAD and can then be used as a screen to invade russia, ergo russia is nervous of that. not that hard to get since most tanks and warships use AMS. i assume russia is working on tech that defeats the AMS system put in place as the cycle of military innovation happens.

[QUOTE=TheKingofBees;43322302]It neutralizes the concept of MAD and can then be used as a screen to invade russia, ergo russia is nervous of that. not that hard to get since most tanks and warships use AMS. i assume russia is working on tech that defeats the AMS system put in place as the cycle of military innovation happens.[/QUOTE] It's a hard concept to understand for the majority of people, judging by the ratings.

[QUOTE=laserguided;43321003]So they don't oppose it? [editline]26th December 2013[/editline] So they don't oppose it or see it as a threat? No guys, don't worry, this totally won't be used against Russia in the event of war.[/QUOTE] Do you frequent Nashi meetings often?

[QUOTE=TheKingofBees;43322302]It neutralizes the concept of MAD and can then be used as a screen to invade russia, ergo russia is nervous of that. not that hard to get since most tanks and warships use AMS. i assume russia is working on tech that defeats the AMS system put in place as the cycle of military innovation happens.[/QUOTE] Okay guys listen the Cold War has been over for awhile so I'm not sure where all this mutually assures destruction talk is coming from since its 2013. What's with the America vs. Russia boner?

[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;43322783]Okay guys listen the Cold War has been over for awhile so I'm not sure where all this mutually assures destruction talk is coming from since its 2013. What's with the America vs. Russia boner?[/QUOTE] The Cold War may be over, but Russia's aims to be a global power (or [I]the[/I] global power) have not ended, especially with Czar Putin at it's head.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;43323016]The Cold War may be over, but Russia's aims to be a global power (or [I]the[/I] global power) have not ended, especially with Czar Putin at it's head.[/QUOTE] Is wanting your country to be significant a bad thing?

[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;43323068]Is wanting your country to be significant a bad thing?[/QUOTE] That would be entirely dependent on the methods. Territorial expansion tends to be frowned at. Nice to meet you, Facepunch.

[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;43323068]Is wanting your country to be significant a bad thing?[/QUOTE] Yes, because it usually results in the oppression and subjugation of other nations to the more significant country's will.

[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;43322783]Okay guys listen the Cold War has been over for awhile so I'm not sure where all this mutually assures destruction talk is coming from since its 2013. What's with the America vs. Russia boner?[/QUOTE] MAD is always relevant since it prevents conflicts from escalating, if we either never had Nuclear weapons or had no actual repercussions from its use then the world would be pretty war torn right now. the threat of virtually eradicating our species suppresses our baser instincts. i mention US and russia since that is what the piece is on and they are the two that would have the biggest interest if something tips the scales such as the technology that is mentioned. thus if russia want's to still make credible their ability to project force then they would need to develop technology that defeats it, and thus continue the cycle. if you want to think of the concept as some sort of simple black and white thing so be it, but this is a [I]really[/I] important concept in international relations that is far more abstract.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;43323289]Yes, because it usually results in the oppression and subjugation of other nations to the more significant country's will.[/QUOTE] Well the eurasian union seems to be rather beneficial to its smaller members so far, at least from what I can tell.

Why do the U.S. defenses need to be anywhere else but the U.S.?

[QUOTE]Iskander missiles[/QUOTE] [IMG]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/111996868/TOY-RBT-03184_01.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;43320241]ICBMs and IRBMs go pretty fucking high - is the Patriot system really useful at those altitudes? Against a target flying at around >4.5km/s?[/QUOTE] According to Wiki, the Patriot has a max altitude of about 79,500 feet when launched from the ground, but have reached 275,500 feet when launched from an F-15. They shot down SCUD missiles during the 91 Gulf War, and shot down 2 coalition fighter planes in Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Can we ban RT as a source? Please?

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;43320241]ICBMs and IRBMs go pretty fucking high - is the Patriot system really useful at those altitudes? Against a target flying at around >4.5km/s?[/QUOTE] the US recently (2006) shot down their own spy satellite at an altitude of 247km, when the satellite was going at ~7.8km/s, so it is definitely possible

[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;43321125]is invading poland part of a ritual for european based wars or something[/QUOTE] so it seems(it even has a freaking disambiguation page on wikipedia lol). [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Poland_(disambiguation)[/url] maybe one day poland will get pissed off at everyone for all the times it was invaded, and invade everyone else :v: WW3: poland vs the world.

[QUOTE=SexualShark;43325536]Can we ban RT as a source? Please?[/QUOTE] it is just about as sensationalist as other sources like the daily mail and fox, albeit with a pro-russian, anti-west swing. seeing that we have not banned the others i don't understand why we should ban this one. just take it with a grain of salt.