rumours the us will place IRBMs in europe...

Soldieroffortune

as per title
report in RT that theyre thinking about it, opinions?

baloney.

Original post by asdsadsa

baloney.

insightful.... i should mention this is only intel the kremlin is investigating although given obama and that tart clinton if she wins it could well prove true given the nation attacking f3eedoms across the world seems to want war.

Reply 3

MatureStudent36

Original post by Soldieroffortune

as per title
report in RT that theyre thinking about it, opinions?

Stop watching RT. It's a state owns propoganda machine.

Reply 4

Aj12

Original post by MatureStudent36

Stop watching RT. It's a state owns propoganda machine.

Our defence sec mentioned it could be an option and if the Americans wanted to do it we'd consider their request.

Don't really see the issue personally.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 5

MagicNMedicine

Sounds fair enough.

Hopefully the US would reciprocate by allowing us to base some missile sites in southern US so that we can strike Argentina in the event of any aggression towards the Falklands.

They should be understanding that we are allies and support our strategic interests.

Reply 6

Duncan2012

US has no IRBMs (source Wikipedia).

RT=/= accurate news.

Reply 7

Soldieroffortune

Original post by MatureStudent36

Stop watching RT. It's a state owns propoganda machine.

so's every news channel take the bbc... besides all they said was theyre investigating reports of it, the us believe russia broke the ban so theyre considering it...

Original post by Duncan2012

US has no IRBMs (source Wikipedia).

RT=/= accurate news.

yes it does or at the very leasr the means to deploy them immediately ...

Reply 8

MatureStudent36

After annexing a neighbouring country and starting to feel the impact of sanctions, the Kremlin has got RT on a mission to make out Russia's being targeted.

Tomahawk is being replaced but it's not an IRBM.

Reply 9

Pegasus2

Original post by Soldieroffortune

so's every news channel take the bbc... besides all they said was theyre investigating reports of it, the us believe russia broke the ban so theyre considering it...

yes it does or at the very leasr the means to deploy them immediately ...

No, every channel is not a propaganda machine. They may have biases but they don't spoonfeed the nation what ever their leader tells them to. All news feeds are seperate entities in the west, they report what they want to, sure they might have some bias and the BBC's ways have dipped a bit in the last 5 years. In Rus, they are ALL owned by the government and ALL follow the government line, which is usually to make everyone else out to be the bad guys and how the big bad west and NATO is slautering civilians left right and center.

This post is the first i've heard of IRBM's

....and if it did have IRBM's...Russia doesn't? ....and doesn't parade them down their streets etc etc.

Russia did break the ban ...or left the treaty. It left the IMF treaty, which bans IRBM's in 2007. The US formerly left the AMB (anti-ballistic missile - so defensive missiles only) treaty in 2001.

If Rus would stop saber rattling and settle down, things would go back to no one careing. Before all this Ukraine crap the west trusted Russia to a reasonable degree. Now it doesn't and nor does the rest of the world, except Russia's allies....that it doesn't have.

Rus Is its own worst enemy sometimes and a headache for everyone else. It's starting to sound like North Korea.

As per everyone else, stop watching RT....or any other Russian state media for that matter. It's not a news channel, it's sole purpose is to undermine the west. It NEVER says anything bad about Russia or Putin or even mentions them.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 10

Rakas21

Good. I think that the US should put missiles in Europe.. for defensive purposes of course.

Reply 11

Soldieroffortune

Original post by MatureStudent36

it has traditionally been russian for centuries and it isnt acountry.
the sanctions are minimal just annoying..
well it is its done nothing we havent done and the pinkos in the west in their hypocrisy dare to criticize russia?
tomohawk is a cruise missile a crappy version of brahmos I_II an irbm is somewhat different...

Original post by Pegasus2

No, every channel is not a propaganda machine. They may have biases but they don't spoonfeed the nation what ever their leader tells them to. All news feeds are separate entities in the west, they report what they want to, sure they might have some bias and the BBC's ways have dipped a bit in the last 5 years. In Rus, they are ALL owned by the government and ALL follow the government line, which is usually to make everyone else out to be the bad guys and how the big bad west and NATO is slautering civilians left right and center.

This post is the first i've heard of IRBM's

....and if it did have IRBM's...Russia doesn't? ....and doesn't parade them down their streets etc etc.

Russia did break the ban ...or left the treaty. It left the IMF treaty, which bans IRBM's in 2007. The US formerly left the AMB (anti-ballistic missile - so defensive missiles only) treaty in 2001.

If Rus would stop saber rattling and settle down, things would go back to no one careing. Before all this Ukraine crap the west trusted Russia to a reasonable degree. Now it doesn't and nor does the rest of the world, except Russia's allies....that it doesn't have.

Rus Is its own worst enemy sometimes and a headache for everyone else. It's starting to sound like North Korea.

As per everyone else, stop watching RT....or any other Russian state media for that matter. It's not a news channel, it's sole purpose is to undermine the west. It NEVER says anything bad about Russia or Putin or even mentions them.

this post is hogwash. and just because theyre not deployed doesnt mean they cant be theyre easy for russia to make.
russia never broke the ban as you said they dont field irbms and the imf doesnt enforce nuclear policy.

oh youre worse than cnn and fox with your anti russian propaganda, they dont have an offensive missile system on americas doorstep they dont arm mexico against the usa they dont bomb every country in sight... america is a rogue state compared to russia and nato is, iraq pakistan and afghanistan [cluster bombs]not to mention libya and syria etc. also isil is armed with American weapons, do some research before posting this rubbish.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 12

Soldieroffortune

Original post by Rakas21

Good. I think that the US should put missiles in Europe.. for defensive purposes of course.

against what? the new russian icbms and slbms will then target europe, why make us a target for tge war mongers on capitol hill? all putting offensive weapons in europe will do is make russia counter with newer and better weapons... you want to see europe become a blasted heath because of the mentally subnormal commanders in america?
irbms arent defensive theyre offensive systems...

Reply 13

Rakas21

Original post by Soldieroffortune

Be realistic.. If Russia is not already targeting us then it won't take them long to should they wish anyway.

Reply 14

Soldieroffortune

Original post by Rakas21

Be realistic.. If Russia is not already targeting us then it won't take them long to should they wish anyway.

as per some treaty neither the us nor russia can aim missiles at anyone albeit downloading cordinates from glasnost shoukdnt be hard lol
and its not us but europe, 3 missiles and the uk is gone...

Reply 15

Rakas21

Original post by Soldieroffortune

as per some treaty neither the us nor russia can aim missiles at anyone albeit downloading cordinates from glasnost shoukdnt be hard lol
and its not us but europe, 3 missiles and the uk is gone...

If they even fire one its all over anyway so no harm having missiles ready to take them out with us.

I'm in favour.

Original post by Soldieroffortune

as per some treaty neither the us nor russia can aim missiles at anyone albeit downloading cordinates from glasnost shoukdnt be hard lol
and its not us but europe, 3 missiles and the uk is gone...

There's been over 2500 nuckear explosions since 1945.

Reply 18

Pegasus2

Original post by Soldieroffortune

as per some treaty neither the us nor russia can aim missiles at anyone albeit downloading cordinates from glasnost shoukdnt be hard lol
and its not us but europe, 3 missiles and the uk is gone...

...and this guy wonders why we have anti-ICBM systems.

Anyway, I love the like "You have missiles.... make you target" Target in the event of what exactly? ...Just generally or when you decide to try and first strike everyone....

Yeah, because we wern't a target already and because if we didn't have them we could totally trust Russia implicitly, like when they told Ukraine to give up their nukes for respect of their territory and sovreignty.

oh and saying ISIL is using US weapons is pretty RT propaganda, how delusional do you need to be. Hasn't every Middle eastern war been faught with AK's, RPG's and T54 & T72's? Not that you supplied them directly during a conflict, but they are soviet weapons. I've yet to see any pictures of an ISIL member holding an M4.

Once last thing, you mention cluster bombs in Syria. Asad is using RBK-250 clusterbombs of soviet design and Russia dropped them on Georgia in 2008

As of 2010, the use of cluster bombs by most western countires is banned, except the US. Rus is not interested in the treaty.