Vladimir Putin attacks US missile defence

[Babur]

Putin has criticised the US missile defence system planned in Europe

Would such a missile defence system even be effective against Russian MIRVs though?:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Vladimir Putin attacks US missile defence


Mr Putin has criticised the original US missile shield plans

US plans for a missile defence shield are holding up a new nuclear disarmament treaty, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has said.
Russia and the US are yet to find a successor to the Cold War-era Start I treaty, which expired on 5 December.
Analysts say Moscow wants a clause in the new treaty that would limit the scale of any US defence shield.
The US has shelved plans for missile defence stations in Central Europe, but intends to use a sea-based system.
Asked by a reporter what was the biggest problem blocking a new treaty, Mr Putin said: "What is the problem? The problem is that our American partners are building an anti-missile shield and we are not building one."
"By building such an umbrella over themselves, our [US] partners could feel themselves fully secure and will do whatever they want, which upsets the balance," the Russian premier added.
ANALYSIS

Rupert Wingfield-Hayes, BBC Moscow correspondent
Russia's government said until just a few days ago that these strategic arms reduction treaty talks were in their final stages, that they were perhaps just a couple of weeks away from signing a new document.
And now suddenly Mr Putin has come out with this statement, which really does put a spanner in the works.
It shows just how nervous Russia is about the idea of a US missile defence shield, despite the fact President Obama in September said they were going to scrap land-based missile defence in Europe.
The US plans to build another system; the Russians don't know exactly how that's going to affect them and how it may neutralise their nuclear deterrent. I think Mr Putin is voicing a concern that is held by many experts in this country.

He said that "to preserve the balance, we must develop offensive weapons systems", but did not specify what kinds he had in mind.
Earlier this month, President Dmitry Medvedev said Russia would continue to develop new warheads, delivery vehicles and launchers despite the disarmament talks, describing this as "routine practice".
Russia and the US are negotiating in Geneva on the details of a new treaty. Last week, the Russian foreign minister said a deal was very close.
The 1991 Start I treaty led to deep cuts in nuclear arsenals by Washington and Moscow.
Both sides have agreed to continue observing Start I until they reach a new agreement.
Under a joint understanding signed in July, deployed nuclear warheads should be cut to fewer than 1,700 on each side within seven years of a new treaty - a huge cut on Soviet-era levels.
Nonetheless, between them the two countries will retain enough firepower to destroy the world several times over.
The BBC's Rupert Wingfield-Hayes in Moscow says that Russia's nuclear arsenal is the only part of its military that remains world-class, and therefore it fears that it could be disadvantaged by cuts to nuclear capability.
Mr Putin's comments could be a negotiating ploy, rather than a reversal of Russia's commitment to a treaty, our correspondent says.
Analysts in Moscow think what Mr Putin really wants is a commitment from Washington to only deploy a small scale missile defence system, that would be effective against Iran and North Korea but would not neutralise Russia's nuclear missile force, he adds.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8433352.stm

[Salvatorel]

Let's see what will happen,according to Putin's recent speech on OPT they are planning to launch new "attack" doctrine,I doubt that it will be an actual attack doctrine,but in either way it marks the start of the new era,with more aggressive Russia with "give no quarter" policies,which of course won't end well,but when the west acknowledges this, it will be too late.

[Babur]

Let's see what will happen,according to Putin's recent speech on OPT they are planning to launch new "attack" doctrine,I doubt that it will be an actual attack doctrine,but in either way it marks the start of the new era,with more aggressive Russia with "give no quarter" policies,which of course won't end well,but when the west acknowledges this, it will be too late.

I thought such a policy wasn't exactly new though

[s.rwitt]

Asked by a reporter what was the biggest problem blocking a new treaty, Mr Putin said: "What is the problem? The problem is that our American partners are building an anti-missile shield and we are not building one."

Then ****ing build one Putin. See if we care. YOU don't get to tell US what defensive systems we can use.

[TheTrainee]

YOU don't get to tell US what defensive systems we can use.

I'm sure Iran and North Korea would like to say the same thing.

[Deus Z]

The biggest loser in this attitude will as always end up to be the people of Russia.

[motiv-8]

The biggest loser in this attitude will as always end up to be the people of Russia.

So true.

It is time for the US to stop thinking that Russia is still the Soviet Union.

Perhaps it is Russia that should stop thinking it is still the Soviet Union.

[Celsius]

he should be insulted. It is time for the US to stop thinking that Russia is still the Soviet Union.

[Celsius]

or the US thinking it should put its nose everywhere.

[motiv-8]

or the US thinking it should put its nose everywhere.

Uh, if you had bothered to do any kind of topical investigation you would have seen that this is Putin's government putting its nose in US policy, not the other way around.

[Jingles]

I lol'd when I saw this thread title... Had this image of Putin charging headlong into the missile shield armed with a crowbar!

[Koelkastmagneet]

I lol'd when I saw this thread title... Had this image of Putin charging headlong into the missile shield armed with a crowbar!

Meh, it'd be more exciting then just more of the usual empty threats.

[s.rwitt]

or the US thinking it should put its nose everywhere.

You mean like, say, thinking they can tell other countries where their missile defense shields should be located or thinking they can tell their neighbors who they can and cannot ally with?

[Celsius]

So the US putting up missile defense shield all around russia is not the US butting in?

[motiv-8]

Not at all. It is actually little more than a continuation of NATO policy. I can't think of why you're getting so agitated over it now.

Oh, and "all around Russia" ? Let's not get too melodramatic.

[Celsius]

What if Russia chose to put a missile defense system in Venezuela? What do you think the US would do? They would be mad as hell.

[s.rwitt]

Ah the what if game again. If the US was upset about a Russian missile defense shield in Venezuela it would be just as retarded as the Russians getting butthurt over this.

[Heathen Hammer]

A good response to all this shield jazz would be helping Iran with some nuclear tech.

[s.rwitt]

Yeah, that would be especially productive

[Heathen Hammer]

Yeah, that would be especially productive

As productive as creating a shield against non-existing missiles.