• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NATO: Russia in ‘material breach’ of nuclear arms treaty

Don't delude yourself. Gen. Milley hates the Putin regime.

I didn't comment on whether Milley likes the Putin government. I commented that he has never, ever spoken in the crass and arrogant manner that Tangimo ascribes to him.

Let me assure you that many Russian generals hate the US regime. But they respect its military.

Not my problem if you guys want to believe in your own invincibility.
 
you have to laugh at the arrogance of Americans trying to claim they are the good guys ... part of the INF treaty is the use of and stationing of Anti - ICBM systems just like the The Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System installed in Romania by the USA and the planned installation in Poland both are in violation of the INF treaty and the only country openly tearing up treaties is America ... the EU is pointing it's finger at America as the country that is threatening EU security by the US pull out of the INF .... you might get NATO to jump through hoops for now but NATO's time is about up ... the biggest threat to Europe is not Russia but America ... most Europeans want US bases out of EU countries with the exception of the 4 baltic states in the east

your actions this past decade and more have been anything but friendly towards the EU with the NSA/CIA scandals exposed by Snowden ... you are not our allies

News Flash .... the SM-3 interceptors are Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicles.

For the technically challenged such as yourself, this means that they kill enemy missiles above the atmosphere.

Ergo, they cannot be offensive weapons by their very design.
 
I didn't comment on whether Milley likes the Putin government. I commented that he has never, ever spoken in the crass and arrogant manner that Tangimo ascribes to him.

Let me assure you that many Russian generals hate the US regime. But they respect its military.

Not my problem if you guys want to believe in your own invincibility.

Not my problem if you believe a country with a GDP similar to that of Texas can compete with the US on any level.
 
News Flash .... the SM-3 interceptors are Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicles.

For the technically challenged such as yourself, this means that they kill enemy missiles above the atmosphere.

Ergo, they cannot be offensive weapons by their very design.

but it's illegal to station them in Romania and Poland as agreed in the INF treaty
 
but it's illegal to station them in Romania and Poland as agreed in the INF treaty

SM-3 Interceptors are not offensive weapons ... just as refrigerators are not offensive weapons.

What part of that can't you understand?
 
SM-3 Interceptors are not offensive weapons ... just as refrigerators are not offensive weapons.

What part of that can't you understand?

what part of there use is illegal under the INF treaty ... there use is illegal look up the INF treaty before spouting any more of your nonsense because you do not know what you are talking about

they can also be used offensively ... it's the exact same Mark 41 VLS system the US navy uses to fire it's tomahawk cruise missiles
 
Last edited:
News Flash .... the SM-3 interceptors are Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicles.

For the technically challenged such as yourself, this means that they kill enemy missiles above the atmosphere.

Ergo, they cannot be offensive weapons by their very design.


The issue is with the launchers which can also accommodate cruise missiles, banned under INF. Thus the launchers are also non compliant.


But you know that.
 
Not my problem if you believe a country with a GDP similar to that of Texas can compete with the US on any level.


Russia needs to compete with the US only in terms of mutual ability to inflict catastrophic damage on each other.


It can, does, and will continue to maintain parity in that key regard.
 
what part of there use is illegal under the INF treaty ... there use is illegal look up the INF treaty before spouting any more of your nonsense because you do not know what you are talking about

they can also be used offensively ...

No, they cannot be used offensively to target cities, military bases, etc.

They only operate in low earth orbit (LEO). You know that.

But facts don't mesh with the Kremlin narrative.
 
Russia needs to compete with the US only in terms of mutual ability to inflict catastrophic damage on each other.

It can, does, and will continue to maintain parity in that key regard.

Then it's a zero-sum game. The US can play that game also. No winners.
 
Then it's a zero-sum game. The US can play that game also. No winners.


That's right.


So let's co-operate as independent sovereign states - or can the US not get its head around that concept?
 
No, they cannot be used offensively to target cities, military bases, etc.

They only operate in low earth orbit (LEO). You know that.

But facts don't mesh with the Kremlin narrative.

yes they can be used offensively ... it's the exact same Mark 41 VLS system the US navy uses to fire it's tomahawk cruise missiles and i repeat you don't know what you are talking about
 
So let's co-operate as independent sovereign states - or can the US not get its head around that concept?

Moscow has had since 2010 to cooperate. That ship has sailed.
 
Moscow has had since 2010 to cooperate. That ship has sailed.

From my perspective, Washington has refused co-operation consistently. I agree the boat has now sailed.

We are in a state of limited communication until such time as a more reasonable regime in Washington emerges. That regime will need to have completed the internal acceptance of the US role in a now multi-polar world.
 
We are in a state of limited communication until such time as a more reasonable regime in Washington emerges.

I agree, Trump has to go. Far too soft on Moscow. What is coming in 2020 will be much less pliable.

I don't see any possibility for a reasonable regime in Russia until Czar Vlad is gone, and probably at least a decade beyond that.
 
I agree, Trump has to go. Far too soft on Moscow. What is coming in 2020 will be much less pliable.

I don't see any possibility for a reasonable regime in Russia until Czar Vlad is gone, and probably at least a decade beyond that.

by 2020 the only allies the US will have is Israel and a handful of tin pot Eastern European states ..... the fact is the bulk of the world looks at America and see's Nazi Germany MK2 or the 2nd British Empire ... both vile and bullies in there own right ... you are fast running out of friends
 
by 2020 the only allies the US will have is Israel and a handful of tin pot Eastern European states ..... the fact is the bulk of the world looks at America and see's Nazi Germany MK2 or the 2nd British Empire ... both vile and bullies in there own right ... you are fast running out of friends

Wrong again as always. US allies know Trump has a limited (2020) shelf life. Things will be changing after 2020 for US allies and allied dictatorships (Turkey, SA, Egypt, Philippines, etc) as well.
 
Russia is still interested in maintaining a semblance of European security. The US, sadly, is not, and its European supplicants will pay the price :roll:

https://www.rt.com/news/446521-russia-unga-resolution-inf-treaty/

In an attempt to salvage the cornerstone treaty limiting the deployment of nuclear missiles, which the US has decided to unilaterally suspend, Moscow has introduced a draft resolution to the United Nations General Assembly.

The US decision to leave the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty could seriously undermine international non-proliferation as well as arms control mechanisms, and would jeopardize world security, the Russian delegation said, presenting the draft to the UNGA.
 
Russia is still interested in maintaining a semblance of European security.

Until Moscow withdraws is occupation troops from Georgia, Crimea, and eastern Ukraine .... Russia is not interested in any semblance of European security.
 
Until Moscow withdraws is occupation troops from Georgia, Crimea, and eastern Ukraine .... Russia is not interested in any semblance of European security.


Russia wants a positive security relationship with its European partners, but will of course never withdraw its forces from its own territory.


In reality, Europe knows that Crimea is Russia. So Europe is divided between those who want perpetual conflict (UK, Poland, Baltics) and those who want accommodation and peaceful co-existence (Italy, Germany, Hungary et al).

The US is of course determined to ensure, in its totally selfish interests, that Russia and Europe remain at loggerheads. London and Warsaw are its antagonists in chief, despite their rather unpleasant and grossly incompetent regimes.
 
Russia wants a positive security relationship with its European partners, but will of course never withdraw its forces from its own territory.

You can lie to yourself until the cows come home, but Crimea is not Russian territory. And I'll keep reminding readers of that fact.....

General Assembly Adopts Resolution Calling upon States Not to Recognize Changes in Status of Crimea Region

Sixty-eighth General Assembly
27 MARCH 2014

The Assembly adopted a resolution titled “Territorial integrity of Ukraine”, calling on States, international organizations and specialized agencies not to recognize any change in the status of Crimea or the Black Sea port city of Sevastopol, and to refrain from actions or dealings that might be interpreted as such. Also by the text, the Assembly called on States to “desist and refrain” from actions aimed at disrupting Ukraine’s national unity and territorial integrity, including by modifying its borders through the threat or use of force.
 
~...............In reality, Europe knows that Crimea is Russia. So Europe is divided between those who want perpetual conflict (UK, Poland, Baltics) and those who want accommodation and peaceful co-existence (Italy, Germany, Hungary et al)..............~.
you can mantra your master's delusion of divide and rule of Europe ever working from Russia until you're blue in the face.

The fact remains that with Russian shenanigans of the past years, there is no single country of Europe that you can single out as not being distrustful of the Kremlin. Whether it wants accommodation and peaceful existence or not. And any accommodation will not apply to Kremlin criminal behaviour in breaching international laws and the sovereignty of states.
 
You can lie to yourself until the cows come home, but Crimea is not Russian territory. And I'll keep reminding readers of that fact.....

General Assembly Adopts Resolution Calling upon States Not to Recognize Changes in Status of Crimea Region


I must contend that it you who is deluded here, and indeed lying to yourself.


Crimea is Russian in every meaningful sense. You are clinging onto a de jure interpretation, but I would point you to the de facto situation, and de facto is what matters in a practical sense.
 
Back
Top Bottom