AP: US might deploy “counterforce” missiles in Europe to counter Russia

[Encyclopath]

Saw this AP story in a couple publications just now. Sounds troubling that it's being considered, though I can't imagine we'd undertake that bold of a provocation.

http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/national/united-statesrussianuke-treaty_59770937

 

[Encyclopath]

For some light humor, here's the World Socialist (actual socialist) Society's take on the same story:

US officials consider nuclear strikes against Russia
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/06/05/ukra-j05.html

 

[ArmyATC]

The Tale Of Two Propagandists

The administration is considering three options for responding militarily to Russian missile treaty violations: defenses to stop a treaty-violating missile, the “counterforce” option to attack a missile preemptively and the “countervailing strike capabilities” option that implies the potential use of nuclear forces.

versus:

Three options being considered by the Pentagon are the placement of anti-missile defenses in Europe aimed at shooting Russian missiles out of the sky; a “counterforce” option that would involve pre-emptive non-nuclear strikes on Russia military sites; and finally, “countervailing strike capabilities,” involving the pre-emptive deployment of nuclear missiles against targets inside Russia

First question regarding the first source: Does that mean the US will not stop treaty-violating missiles?

Example: "Hold your fire, that's a treaty-approved nuclear strike.."

Second question for the Socialists: Doesn't the US already pre-emptively deploy nuclear missiles against targets inside Russia? Or would a post-emptive deployment be better for the collective?

Example: (static)....

Regardless, I don't like seeing this word 'pre-emptive' keep showing up. And I agree, the Obama regime will not even send the lethal aid already approved by Congress. So this must be the politicians appearing hawkish in time for the super PAC donations. Pretty much the equivalent of the US 'might' not renew the Patriot Act, a shameless ploy for money and votes.

This also is a response to Russia 'might' deploy nukes in Crimea. Good info though, thanks.

 

[jayfeather31]

Saw this AP story in a couple publications just now. Sounds troubling that it's being considered, though I can't imagine we'd undertake that bold of a provocation.

http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/national/united-statesrussianuke-treaty_59770937

Okay....

 

[ArmyATC]

RF Response

"If the Americans indeed deploy their ground-based nuclear missiles in Europe, in this case we will face the necessity of retaliating. And we have such an opportunity," Zavarzin told TASS on Friday.

He confirmed that the current state and technical equipment of the Russian Armed Forces made it possible to respond immediately to all challenges and threats emanating from outside the country’s borders. "In this case, the US administration needs to weigh everything carefully before making such ill-considered steps," he said.

They may not call it one in today's environment of PC, but that sure souds like statements I heard in the Cold War.

http://tass.ru/en/russia/799098

 

[Missileman]

RF Response

"If the Americans indeed deploy their ground-based nuclear missiles in Europe, in this case we will face the necessity of retaliating. And we have such an opportunity," Zavarzin told TASS on Friday.

He confirmed that the current state and technical equipment of the Russian Armed Forces made it possible to respond immediately to all challenges and threats emanating from outside the country’s borders. "In this case, the US administration needs to weigh everything carefully before making such ill-considered steps," he said.

They may not call it one in today's environment of PC, but that sure souds like statements I heard in the Cold War.


Ah.......I miss those days. We need to start thinking like we did in the 80's.

All this PC, downplaying Russia's capabilities is irritating.

http://tass.ru/en/russia/799098