Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S. Says Russia Tested Missile, Despite Treaty
New York Times ^ | January 29, 2014 | MICHAEL R. GORDON

Posted on 01/30/2014 8:36:45 AM PST by Seizethecarp

The United States informed its NATO allies this month that Russia had tested a new ground-launched cruise missile, raising concerns about Moscow’s compliance with a landmark arms control accord.

With President Obama pledging to seek deeper cuts in nuclear arms, the State Department has been trying to find a way to resolve the compliance issue, preserve the treaty and keep the door open to future arms control accords.

Other officials, who asked not to be identified because they were discussing internal deliberations, said there was no question the missile tests ran counter to the treaty and the administration had already shown considerable patience with the Russians. And some members of Congress, who have been briefed on the tests on a classified basis for well over a year, have been pressing the White House for a firmer response.

The treaty banning the testing, production and possession of medium-range missiles has long been regarded as a major step toward curbing the American and Russian arms race.

But after President Vladimir V. Putin rose to power and the Russian military began to re-evaluate its strategy, the Kremlin developed second thoughts about the accord. During the administration of President George W. Bush, Sergei B. Ivanov, the Russian defense minister, proposed that the two sides drop the treaty.

Though the Cold War was over, he argued that Russia still faced threats from nations on its periphery, including China and potentially Pakistan. But the Bush administration was reluctant to terminate a treaty that NATO nations regarded as a cornerstone of arms control and whose abrogation would have enabled the Russians to increase missile forces directed at the United States’ allies in Asia.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Russia
KEYWORDS: nato; obama; putin; start

1 posted on 01/30/2014 8:36:45 AM PST by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

Don’t think they signed the last treaty. Missile testing?? We test them. Why can’t they?


2 posted on 01/30/2014 8:37:42 AM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

I guess Putin has more flexibility, too.


3 posted on 01/30/2014 8:39:07 AM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
What is Obama to do about it?

Draw a red line?

4 posted on 01/30/2014 8:40:24 AM PST by buckalfa (Tilting at Windmills)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

Don’t worry.

Barry will send them a letter....


5 posted on 01/30/2014 8:41:13 AM PST by illiac (If we don't change directions soon, we'll get where we're going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
Missile testing?? We test them. Why can't they?

They're saying this goes back to 2008??

Sounds like Snowden sent Obama a memo.

6 posted on 01/30/2014 8:44:10 AM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

Barry puts the US at risk to fulfill the “trust but don’t verify” disarmament dreams of his commie youth that followed the Soviet propaganda push in the US at the time.

Here is the NY Times’ assessment of Barry’s article in 1983:

http://documents.nytimes.com/obama-s-1983-college-magazine-article

“Despite Barack Obama’s sympathetic portrayal, his article seemed to question the popular goal of freezing nuclear arms at current levels — rather than cutting arsenals, the topic of his seminar paper. Mr. Obama wondered if the freeze movement “stems from young people’s penchant for the latest ‘happenings’” and called its focus narrow.”


7 posted on 01/30/2014 8:44:32 AM PST by Seizethecarp (Defend aircraft from "runway kill zone" mini-drone helicopter swarm attacks: www.runwaykillzone.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

If you’re a foreign leader, its pretty obvious that U.S. influence and power are rapidly diminishing. Why should the Russians bother to comply with anything when there are no consequences for doing whatever you want? The rest of the world is reaching the same conclusions.


8 posted on 01/30/2014 8:45:24 AM PST by Starboard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buckalfa

“What is Obama to do about it?”

He is entirely way too IMPOTENT to do anything about it.


9 posted on 01/30/2014 8:45:57 AM PST by areukiddingme1 (areukiddingme1 is a synonym for a Retired U.S. Navy Chief Petty Officer and tired of liberal BS.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
...the administration had already shown considerable patience with the Russians.

Patience describes a situation where you actually care. Obama hasn't shown patience, he's shown apathy.

10 posted on 01/30/2014 8:46:55 AM PST by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

Sometimes I wonder if we should really trust the Russians...


11 posted on 01/30/2014 8:47:16 AM PST by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starboard

+1

What is Bam Bam going to do? Not unilaterally disarm as fast as he would if the Russians played nice?

The Russians know he won’t build up anything in response. They know Obama believes weakness is a virtue. And the Russians also know the congress fears being called racist more than they care about our nuclear deterrent and our national security.

I think the only incentive for the Russians to APPEAR to play nice is that it may provide them the opportunity in the future to get rid of “Glavni Vrag” once and for all when we have disarmed to that point...


12 posted on 01/30/2014 9:00:33 AM PST by Wildbill22 (They have us surrounded again, the poor bastards- Gen Creighton Williams Abrams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: illiac; tx_eggman

not *just* a letter... a strongly-worded letter. Possibly in ALL CAPS. He has a pen and a phone, you know.


13 posted on 01/30/2014 9:01:44 AM PST by SpinnerWebb (IN-SAPORIBVS-SICVT-PVLLVM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

"But Putin promised me...."


14 posted on 01/30/2014 9:08:37 AM PST by Iron Munro ("Sooner or later everyone sits down to a banquet of consequences." - Robert Louis Stevenson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
Big surprise — the Russians cheat. (Of course, in the fever swamps of Washington, DC this IS a major revelation.) Maybe Vlad Putin needs to send Barry a 20 KT “love note” with his new cruise missile to impress the idiots inside the Beltway.
15 posted on 01/30/2014 9:16:07 AM PST by MasterGunner01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

“We test them. Why can’t they?”

IIRC, this is about intermediate range ground-based missiles that threaten our European NATO allies. The US gave up testing and deploying such weapons in exchange for the USSR doing the same.

Back in the hapless Carter Admin the Rooskies were intimidating our NATO allies with the SS-20 intermediate range nuke missile. If the USSR got off a first strike and NATO weapons weren’t available to retaliate in-theater, the war would be over before the US could retaliate with more remote weapons. NATO allies weren’t confident that a weak US president like Carter (or currently Barry) would initiate mutual assured destruction if Europe was already fried and the Russians were stoking that fear.

At first Carter countered with the neutron bomb, but after key NATO leaders stuck their necks out and backed it, Carter backed out leaving they with the political damage coming and going and leaving NATO exposed.

When Reagan got in he countered the SS-20s with the Pershing, IIRC. (don’t quote me) as well as air-launched assets. Then when Reagan backed Gorbachev into a corner will our military build-up combined with collapsing the world oil price killing Soviet hard currency, the 1987 treaty was signed signally that the USSR was backing down from intimidating NATO unilaterally.


16 posted on 01/30/2014 9:27:10 AM PST by Seizethecarp (Defend aircraft from "runway kill zone" mini-drone helicopter swarm attacks: www.runwaykillzone.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

The Chinese and the Russians are getting whilst the getting is good.

Who can blame them - who wouldn’t?

Backdoor Bath House is a pushover on the international stage.

He won’t contest the Chinese or Russians, but he’ll contest conservatives at every turn. Conservatives are the enemy in his foreshortened cranium.


17 posted on 01/30/2014 9:31:11 AM PST by bkopto (Free men are not equal. Equal men are not free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

They don’t need missiles they have Obama&Co on our land.


18 posted on 01/30/2014 9:39:26 AM PST by Vaduz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

Another possibility for this week’s NSS (no s***sherlock) award.


19 posted on 01/30/2014 9:47:53 AM PST by ogen hal (First amendment or reeducation camp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ogen hal

Uh-oh,,, I smell another pink line about to be drawn by Dear Leader.


20 posted on 01/30/2014 10:31:02 AM PST by austinaero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: areukiddingme1
"He is entirely way too IMPOTENT"
Yes, everybody knows it, including Reggie Love..

21 posted on 01/30/2014 10:34:41 AM PST by skinkinthegrass (The end move in politics is always to pick up a gun..0'Caligula / 0'Reid / 0'Pelosi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

When you are a scumbag, untrustworthy liar, don’t be surprised when people do the same to you.


22 posted on 01/30/2014 10:43:48 AM PST by Lazamataz (Early 2009 to 7/21/2013 - RIP my little girl Cathy. You were the best cat ever. You will be missed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp; Lazamataz; Travis McGee

All is not as it seems. A careful reading of the NY Times article and of the Russian test shows that the NY Slimes is banging the drums for a big war.

Up is down.


23 posted on 01/30/2014 3:29:51 PM PST by Southack (The one thing preppers need from the 1st World? http://tinyurl.com/ktfwljc .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

This article shows the 2007 Russian missile tests: http://cns.miis.edu/stories/070601.htm

The “controversy” being hyped today over the “Intermediate Range” missile test also existed back in 2007, which is that Russia is permitted to develop and test short range ICBM’s with ranges below 500KM, but that the U.S. includes the 200KM Iskander missle on the list as a banned Intermediate Range weapon.

Iskander is named in the treaty, so it is banned even though the U.S.-CCCP treaty only bans the Intermediate range tests of weapons with ranges greater than 500KM.


24 posted on 01/30/2014 3:39:26 PM PST by Southack (The one thing preppers need from the 1st World? http://tinyurl.com/ktfwljc .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson