RUSSIA threatens DENMARK with NUCLEAR MISSILES Watch

This discussion is closed.
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#21
Report 4 years ago
#21
(Original post by ChickenMadness)
Don't see the big deal. NATO and USA have missiles aimed at Russia and vice versa. If Denmark joins them, obviously Russia needs to start aiming some missiles at them too lol.
Incorrect. As part of previous arms deals weapons in either side were no longer pointing at each other.

It's academic really, more posturing as keying in a set of coordinates get the missiles fieing at whatever target you want to.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#22
Report 4 years ago
#22
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
Incorrect. As part of previous arms deals weapons in either side were no longer pointing at each other.

It's academic really, more posturing as keying in a set of coordinates get the missiles fieing at whatever target you want to.
Well, as you are well aware:
1) the whole "pointing at each other" is a figure of speech
2) they don't need to be pointed at the target to hit the target anyway
0
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#23
Report 4 years ago
#23
(Original post by ChickenMadness)
Don't see the big deal. NATO and USA have missiles aimed at Russia and vice versa. If Denmark joins them, obviously Russia needs to start aiming some missiles at them too lol.
It's more symbolic. They decided not to point them at each other in the mid 90s
0
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#24
Report 4 years ago
#24
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Well, as you are well aware:
1) the whole "pointing at each other" is a figure of speech
2) they don't need to be pointed at the target to hit the target anyway
I know
0
Aj12
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#25
Report 4 years ago
#25
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
The thing is, they're threatening Denmark in the exact same way they are threatening us and the US, what they say is perfectly true, if Denmark arm themselves against Russia they become 100% valid targets (not that they weren't before), of course, this is news because it's Russia. Suppose it the other way around, and, say, Belarus were putting in a missile system against NATO, they would become nuclear targets for NATO, except our media would say nothing about it coz NATO.
Anyone who knows anything about nuclear doctrine will know this to be true. That's not the issue. The issue is at a time when tensions are already high, why say it publicly?

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
uberteknik
  • Study Helper
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#26
Report 4 years ago
#26
(Original post by Aj12)
Anyone who knows anything about nuclear doctrine will know this to be true. That's not the issue. The issue is at a time when tensions are already high, why say it publicly?

Posted from TSR Mobile
Because Putin's worried the sanctions are biting and may already be causing internal tension within his government and division within the Russian population.

It's a show of muscle flexing to bolster populist public support for him to continue in office and maintain his authority and policies.

The move paints the EU and NATO as the enemy and reinforces the Russian propaganda image that the EU and NATO are the instigators of the Eastern Ukraine and Crimean actions.

It's all part of the 'We love Putin the good and great saviour' propaganda machine.
1
icdjabtjk
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#27
Report 4 years ago
#27
(Original post by Aj12)
Anyone who knows anything about nuclear doctrine will know this to be true. That's not the issue. The issue is at a time when tensions are already high, why say it publicly?

Posted from TSR Mobile
In an interview in the newspaper Jyllands-Posten, the Russian ambassador to Denmark, Mikhail Vanin, said he did not think Danes fully understood the consequences of joining the program.
"If that happens, Danish warships will be targets for Russian nuclear missiles," Vanin told the newspaper.


That was what was said, a journalist asked the russian ambassador what he thought of the danish ships joining the NATO missile system and the reply was that these ships would become targets (in the case of a nuclear war). Then the Western anti-Russian propaganda then proceeded to make a big deal out of it and twist the words to make it sound like Russia has just threatened denmark with a nuclear attack, to keep up the anti-russia rhetoric in the west, and as they twist and manipulate everything they can for their propaganda machine. For another example making a big deal out of russian warships travelling along the english channel (as they do regularly every year and have an agreement to do so) and planes flying in international airspace a few hundred miles from the UK (again as they do regularly every year) trying to warp it into an idea that Russia is threatening the UK. Pure propaganda.

I think a better question is why is NATO lying and claiming that all of this is directed at intercepting missiles from Iran when Iran has no long range missiles, including the Denmark warships LOL.

Watch this, its relevant and quite funny
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ux3oiWELIQ
1
icdjabtjk
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#28
Report 4 years ago
#28
(Original post by uberteknik)
Because he's worried the sanctions are biting and may already be causing internal tension within his government and division within the Russian population.

It's a show of muscle flexing to bolster populist public support for him to continue in office and maintain his authority and policies.

The move paints the EU and NATO as the enemy and reinforces the Russian propaganda image that the EU and NATO are the instigators of the Eastern Ukraine and Crimean actions.

It's all part of the 'We love Putin the good and great saviour' propaganda machine.
You're really clueless, youre claiming that Putin has said something because he's worried and in order to flex his muscles... see my comment above, please stop watching western news wow
0
uberteknik
  • Study Helper
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#29
Report 4 years ago
#29
(Original post by wsxcde)
You're really clueless, youre claiming that Putin has said something because he's worried and in order to flex his muscles... see my comment above, please stop watching western news wow
Drink some more vodka and don't make me laugh so hard this early in the morning!
0
icdjabtjk
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#30
Report 4 years ago
#30
(Original post by uberteknik)
Drink some more vodka and don't make me laugh so hard this early in the morning!
your comment earlier didnt make any sense "because hes..." who are you talking about the russian ambassador who was asked the question and responded that danish warships would be a target, or Putin who did not make the comment? Maybe you've been on the vodka a bit?
0
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#31
Report 4 years ago
#31
(Original post by wsxcde)
In an interview in the newspaper Jyllands-Posten, the Russian ambassador to Denmark, Mikhail Vanin, said he did not think Danes fully understood the consequences of joining the program.
"If that happens, Danish warships will be targets for Russian nuclear missiles," Vanin told the newspaper.


That was what was said, a journalist asked the russian ambassador what he thought of the danish ships joining the NATO missile system and the reply was that these ships would become targets (in the case of a nuclear war). Then the Western anti-Russian propaganda then proceeded to make a big deal out of it and twist the words to make it sound like Russia has just threatened denmark with a nuclear attack, to keep up the anti-russia rhetoric in the west, and as they twist and manipulate everything they can for their propaganda machine. For another example making a big deal out of russian warships travelling along the english channel (as they do regularly every year and have an agreement to do so) and planes flying in international airspace a few hundred miles from the UK (again as they do regularly every year) trying to warp it into an idea that Russia is threatening the UK. Pure propaganda.

I think a better question is why is NATO lying and claiming that all of this is directed at intercepting missiles from Iran when Iran has no long range missiles, including the Denmark warships LOL.

Watch this, its relevant and quite funny
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ux3oiWELIQ
Because iran has been developing nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles to carry them and is crazy enough to use such a weapons system.

It's always better to have a defence system in place before a potential threat materialises.
0
icdjabtjk
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#32
Report 4 years ago
#32
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
Because iran has been developing nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles to carry them and is crazy enough to use such a weapons system.

It's always better to have a defence system in place before a potential threat materialises.
no Iran has not been developing nuclear weapons at all. This is a lie used to justify economic warfare, propaganda and likely future western invasion of Iran. If you actually look at the capabilities of Irans nuclear energy program they can only enrich uranium to nowhere near the level needed to create nuclear weapons but enough to create nuclear energy for the country. The missile defence shield in Europe is nothing to do with intercepting missiles from Iran, it is designed to surround Russia. That the west keeps on claiming that it's to intercept missiles from Iran is such an idiotic lie my only conclusion is that they are saying it as a joke to wind Russia up. It is completely illogical to build a shiled in Denmark, Poland etc to intercept missiles from Iran when other areas such as Turkey, a NATO member, which is in between Iran and Europe and where these fictional missiles fired from Iran into Europe would go over if they were fired, would be the most ideal location for this (but of course Iran has no nuclear weapons, is not making nuclear weapons, is not planning on making nuclear weapons and does not have ICBMs to attack Europe with). Iran is not a threat to any other country, they have not invaded any other country for hundreds of years, the last war Iran had was the Iraq-Iran war in which the USA gave Saddam Hussain (who was at that time their ally (puppet)) lots of chemical weapons and told him to attack Iran with them. The west and Israel are a huge threat to Iran (and obviously the rest of the middle east and any other weak countries they may like to invade). Here is a US general saying in 2007 that the USA is going to invade Iran in a list of other countries https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXS3vW47mOE Please do not just read newspapers and watch news in the UK and think they are impartial and not full of propaganda.
0
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#33
Report 4 years ago
#33
(Original post by wsxcde)
no Iran has not been developing nuclear weapons at all. This is a lie used to justify economic warfare, propaganda and likely future western invasion of Iran. If you actually look at the capabilities of Irans nuclear energy program they can only enrich uranium to nowhere near the level needed to create nuclear weapons but enough to create nuclear energy for the country. The missile defence shield in Europe is nothing to do with intercepting missiles from Iran, it is designed to surround Russia. That the west keeps on claiming that it's to intercept missiles from Iran is such an idiotic lie my only conclusion is that they are saying it as a joke to wind Russia up. It is completely illogical to build a shiled in Denmark, Poland etc to intercept missiles from Iran when other areas such as Turkey, a NATO member, which is in between Iran and Europe and where these fictional missiles fired from Iran into Europe would go over if they were fired, would be the most ideal location for this (but of course Iran has no nuclear weapons, is not making nuclear weapons, is not planning on making nuclear weapons and does not have ICBMs to attack Europe with). Iran is not a threat to any other country, they have not invaded any other country for hundreds of years, the last war Iran had was the Iraq-Iran war in which the USA gave Saddam Hussain (who was at that time their ally (puppet)) lots of chemical weapons and told him to attack Iran with them. The west and Israel are a huge threat to Iran (and obviously the rest of the middle east and any other weak countries they may like to invade). Here is a US general saying in 2007 that the USA is going to invade Iran in a list of other countries https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXS3vW47mOE Please do not just read newspapers and watch news in the UK and think they are impartial and not full of propaganda.
Paragraphs are a wonderful thing. You should try to use them at some point.

You may want to read up on the history of the iran / iraq war.

Remember when Amadinajan threatened to wipe Israel from the map? Considering iraw and straps is between the two nations, what do you think he was going to use as the rubber?
0
uberteknik
  • Study Helper
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#34
Report 4 years ago
#34
(Original post by Cornellias)
NATO and the West ARE the ****ing problem you stupid ****ing *****. NATO forces are surrounding this country and you don't think that is provocative?
Calm down dear, don't have a cow.
0
icdjabtjk
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#35
Report 4 years ago
#35
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
Paragraphs are a wonderful thing. You should try to use them at some point.

You may want to read up on the history of the iran / iraq war.

Remember when Amadinajan threatened to wipe Israel from the map? Considering iraw and straps is between the two nations, what do you think he was going to use as the rubber?
I know a lot about the Iraq-Iran war. Like the time the USA gave Iraq all of those chemical weapons to use and how saddam was the USAs best friend back then.

I rember the time when Amadinajan said "Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad" in which he was talking about what another person said, directly translated (and without the context of the rest of the conversation or who he was talking about) "The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time" and then the western media decided to cherry pick this part of the conversation, translate their propaganda version of it "Iran calls for Israel to be wiped off the map" alongside fictional claims of Iranian nuclear weapons, making it seem as if Iran has stated it wished to nuke Israel. So hopefully you can see that it is propaganda made for people like you to happily lap up.

Here you can see him actually talking on the topic of Israel and Palestine rather than read propaganda warping his words with biased propaganda based (mis)translations https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wshxtuLfVJ4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLNHTg7BCUE

What I do also remember is the time that Netanyahu said that he will never allow a palestinian state to exist, a few weeks ago lol.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#36
Report 4 years ago
#36
(Original post by Aj12)
Anyone who knows anything about nuclear doctrine will know this to be true. That's not the issue. The issue is at a time when tensions are already high, why say it publicly?

Posted from TSR Mobile
I would say wsxcde did a good enough job answering this.
0
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#37
Report 4 years ago
#37
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
I would say wsxcde did a good enough job answering this.
No he didn't. He's obviously iranian based and attempting to push a olitical line. Must line lockheedspolys doing the same for our red sea pedestrian friends.
This thread has sweet FA to do with Iran.
0
icdjabtjk
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#38
Report 4 years ago
#38
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
No he didn't. He's obviously iranian based and attempting to push a olitical line. Must line lockheedspolys doing the same for our red sea pedestrian friends.
This thread has sweet FA to do with Iran.
Im not biased at all, just telling the truth, what did I say which was biased? The truth is that you are biased. You claimed that a missile shield including in Denmark is good because Iran is a threat and you claimed that Amadinajan threatened to wipe Israel from the map when he did not.
0
icdjabtjk
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#39
Report 4 years ago
#39
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
No he didn't. He's obviously iranian based and attempting to push a olitical line. Must line lockheedspolys doing the same for our red sea pedestrian friends.
This thread has sweet FA to do with Iran.
and by the way I linked you some videos about Israel but the truth was censored by a moderator for some reason, they are probably pro-israel, in favour of attacking children in palestine, and trying to hide the truth, but here it is, this is what is ACTUALLY happening
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHYOkCmEjFA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPWi6x8HshM
0
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#40
Report 4 years ago
#40
(Original post by wsxcde)
Im not biased at all, just telling the truth, what did I say which was biased? The truth is that you are biased. You claimed that a missile shield including in Denmark is good because Iran is a threat and you claimed that Amadinajan threatened to wipe Israel from the map when he did not.
I like the idea of ABM shields.

The Aster missile can also be used.
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Would you turn to a teacher if you were being bullied?

Yes (1)
10%
No (9)
90%

Watched Threads

View All