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.
MOSCOW (AP) - A top military official said Russia's new military doctrine, which expands the conditions under which nuclear weapons could be used, also applies to protecting allies, the Interfax news agency reported Tuesday.
The doctrine had raised concerns among some observers because it says Russia could use nuclear weapons if other means to repel an aggressor fail. Previous policy said nuclear weapons could be used only if Russia's sovereignty was threatened.
Col. Gen. Valery Manilov, first deputy chief of the Russian general staff, told a news conference that the policy also covers aggression against allies, the report said.
Interfax did not specify what countries Manilov considers allies. Russian officials have previously said that the so-called ``nuclear umbrella'' applies to Belarus, which has signed a treaty with Russia.
Manilov rejected concerns that the new military doctrine reflects an increasingly confrontational attitude.
``The reverse is true. We regard all countries as potential partners in upholding security and stability in the world,'' the report quoted him as saying.
Bump.
US sees nothing new in Russia's military doctrine
Security Council approves new Russian military doctrine
From the article and the two links we beging to see what Russia's new nuclear doctrine is:
First to deliver a nuclear strike
Extends its nuclear umbrella to allies
Doesn't specify what countries are its allies
No need to consult the UN security council to take military action
This is short, but pretty much sums up the three articles posted above. I realize this is only a hundredth of what the total doctrine is but below are some links I am going over and will provide some insight into what we are seeing. Two of those are in Russian and I don't read Russian yet, but they might be handy to two folks I know of.
Draft Russian Military Doctrine
Military Doctrine (Draft) - "Nezavisimaya Gazeta", 9 August 1997 (in Russian)
Military Doctrine (Draft) - "Kontseptsii", 23 September 1999 (in Russian)
Let see who are Russia's current allies? Communist China, North Korea, Iraq, Yugoslavia--just to name a few. I can see the threat of Russian nuclear intervention on the side of Communist China in a war with the US over Taiwan as a definite possibility. The Sino-Russian defensive alliance against US aggression covers Taiwan as an exception to the alliance's current essentially defensive nature.
This doctrine is yet more evidence of the Russian preference for the use of a nuclear first strike against the US and whoever else she might consider her enemies. Sounds like a clarion call for the US to deploy a national missile defense system to me.
Any time you deal with Communists and other dictators you must fight the age old problem of determining when a liar is lying. I refer to our own Slick Willie as an example, though his penchant is to lie first and lie again later when the facts don't support his first lie.
Keep in mind, also, that these people don't trust each other either. If Russia or China nuked the U.S. there would be a mad dash by both to try to secure and hold territory. That is their history and their natures. Initially they would probably do the logical thing, let China control the East and Russia the West while splitting the U.S. at the Mississippi River. Yet, from the beginning there would be a distrust of the other and each would have to withhold and rebuild their nuclear capability.
That means they can't use it all on us in the beginning. We could probably destroy them both if Slick would pull the trigger and that is a big IF! Our own President is our biggest problem.
hmmmm. Didn't Milosevic just have an unusual unscheduled meeting with Chinese and Russian leaders? And didn't Putin just recently decide to send forces to the gulf, as well as support for Milosevic. And aren't the chicoms and the Russians both worrying we'll build BMD before they get a chance? And aren't the Chicoms scrambling around to meet with all the world leaders they possibly can? And didn't the Chicoms say that they would give Chen until May 20 to come in line with their beloved "one China" principle, if he refused there would be war...no sorry, "disaster". North Korea...Kosovo....Bin Laden...Pakistan...enough is enough. Am I paranoid or is something afoot??
Russian Military Doctrine (2000)
Does this apply to Chinese efforts in the Taiwan Strait?
Bump
glad you pulled this out!
Don't mess with Russia (and its allies) and we have nothing to worry about. Don't know who Russian allies are? Well here's a crazy thought - let's not mess with any country.
The US has been messing with them for years, Russia hasn't done a thing, except begged for more money.
Obviously you know who "they" are. So please, go ahead, list "them".
Belarus, Ukraine, Yugoslavia, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, and North Korea. Here is the "they."
If Russia or China nuked the U.S. there would be a mad dash by both to try to secure and hold territory. That is their history and their natures. [...] We could probably destroy them both
What do you mean by "their history"? China for example for thousands of years was self-centered and built the Wall to separate from the world. It was British who came to China with weapons and drugs (Opium War). USA did its part in preventing Japan from isolation (Admiral Perry). Russia had a few periods of expansion but usually as a reaction to foreign invasion,
1 after defeating Mongols who dominated Russia first
2 after defeating Poles who dominated Russia first (start of XVIIc).
3 after defeating Napoleon (who tried to dominate Russia)
4 Soviet Russia after defeating Hitler (who attacked Russia first while Stalin tried to apease him).
Russia in the past was strongest and most fierce when faced with a threat of foreign domination. China and other Oriental culture had tendencies to be self-centered and satisfied with fulfilling a certain cultural ideal pattern. It was Westerners who kept coming with the fire and sword.
Successful anti-missile defence would give USA the ability for the first and final strike without fear of retaliation. Both China and Russia know it and they might perceive the West and USA as having aggresive intentions (especially after the Yugoslavia experiment). SDI will be seen as a danger and so this time the REACTION will precede its implementation.
I take it bumped this when you saw today Russia urges U.S. to reduce nuclear arsenal
I take it you bumped this when you saw today Russia urges U.S. to reduce nuclear arsenal
Here is the correct link: Russia urges U.S. to reduce nuclear arsenal
I think EFP in the title was Elian Free Post. LOL.
Where have you been? You are responding to something I wrote 8 months ago.
However, in response to your comments I would suggest thst you are overlooking the activities of China concerning, Tibet, North Korea in the 50s, Vietnam in the 60s and 70s, and their expasion at the moment into the Spratley Islands, etc. Russia has had to withdraw somewhat because they are broke but comsider their activities in Chechyna, etc. Look at the entire picture.
Russia has had to withdraw somewhat because they are broke but comsider their activities in Chechyna, etc.
Let's for a minute even forget that Chechnya is part of Russia --- Guess what? The current conflict is because Chechnya attacked Dagestan (Russia). Oh, and there is no "etc" (or if you think there is, tell us about it).
The US has been messing with them for years, Russia hasn't done a thing, except begged for more money.
Belarus, Ukraine, Yugoslavia, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, and North Korea. Here is the "they."
Russia has never ever begged any of the listed countries for money (quite the opposite). Though I must agree that US has been messing with those countries but what gives us that right? The fact that we haven't begged them for money?
Let's for a minute even forget that Chechnya is part of Russia ---
OK. Let's also forget that they illegally and contrary to their singed agreements after WWII occupied all of eastern Europe. Let's forget that part of the Communist doctrine is to dominate the world. Communism cannot survive without complete control, allowing no dissension, so they must dominate completely or they will fail. Of course, the system always fails anyway.
To deny that China and Russia have an expansionist history IN THE LAST 50 YEARS is to be blind or disingenuinuous.
Russia has never ever begged any of the listed countries for money (quite the opposite).
Those are some of the countries allied with Russia, not the countries Russia begs money off of.. Russia begs money off of the West.
Let's forget that part of the Communist doctrine is to dominate the world. [...]
To deny that China and Russia have an expansionist history IN THE LAST 50 YEARS is to be blind or disingenuinuous.
But this is not specific to the Russian or Chinese Communists. American or German Communists had the same doctrine. The difference was that they managed to take power over Russia weakened by the WWI. Even then the expansion into Eastern Europe was a result of failed German invasion and the US/British/Soviet agreements. Communist China did not do much expansion unless you count the Korean war.
The current conflict is because Chechnya attacked Dagestan (Russia). Oh, and there is no "etc" (or if you think there is, tell us about it).
Holy fk! Ignore the most important part, why don't you?
ibn: Don't mess with Russia (and its allies) and we have nothing to worry about. Don't know who Russian allies are? Well here's a crazy thought - let's not mess with any country.
Sawdring: The US has been messing with them [defined by you as: Belarus, Ukraine, Yugoslavia, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, and North Korea.] for years, Russia hasn't done a thing, except begged for more money.
FYI.
But this is not specific to the Russian or Chinese Communists. American or German Communists had the same doctrine.
You are correct, it is the doctrine of all Communist.
The difference was that they managed to take power over Russia weakened by the WWI.
Perhaps that is what is taught in Poland but it is not histroically accurate. The Communists overthrew the Tsar in 1917 and were in charge for 35 years before the end of WWII.
Even then the expansion into Eastern Europe was a result of failed German invasion and the US/British/Soviet agreements.
Where did you learn all this? The failed invasion toward the end of the war was the German invasion against the American troops as a last gasp effort to stave off defeat. It produced "The Battle of the Bulge" until the U.S. troops regrouped and pushed them back. It was evident that Germany was defeated and Hitler committed suicide.
Russia only then raced to occupy Germany and as much of Eastern Europe as possible. It looked as if the U.S. and Russia may have to fight each other over Europe but Russia backed off and promised to hold free election in Eastern Europe in three years. That was another Communist promise (lie) they never intended to keep and Russia dominated Eastern Europe until the mid-eighties.
Communist China did not do much expansion unless you count the Korean war.
You easily dismiss the Korean War as if it were nothing. It was a major three year battle with many killed on both sides. The Communists still control N. Korea and it is a basket case with millions starving. Are you not aware of what China has done in Tibet, and other nearby countries?
Perhaps that is what is taught in Poland but it is not historically accurate. The Communists overthrew the Tsar in 1917 and were in charge for 35 years before the end of WWII.
Indeed in Poland I was taught in school that Tsar was forced to resign by pro-Western politicians who established a reformist government alienated from general population. This in turn open the way for the Bolshevik coup which happened a number of months later.
Where did you learn all this? The failed invasion toward the end of the war was the German invasion against the American troops as a last gasp effort to stave off defeat. It produced "The Battle of the Bulge" until the U.S. troops regrouped and pushed them back. It was evident that Germany was defeated and Hitler committed suicide.
Well, I learned this in the same Communist controlled schools. I was taught that it was Soviet Russia which engaged most of German troops and defeated tham under Stalingrad, Kursk and many onther battles. According to the program I learned the Americans and British landed on the continent at the end of the war, when Red Army was advancing toward Germany and appearing to be victorious. (According to this teaching Hitler commited a suicide when Russians were taking the capital of Germany - Berlin.
Well, I learned this in the same Communist controlled schools.
Well, try to find some American or other non-Communist history books to get a different picture of the war. In the past few years with Clinton and his leftists stooges in power our schools and text books are starting to resemble those of the Communist controlled schools you attended. Still, there are accurate versions available.
> Well, I learned this in the same
> Communist controlled schools.
Well, try to find some American or other non-Communist history books to get a different picture of the war.
Yes, indeed I saw an American high school materials claiming that the Tsar was overthrown by Bolsheviks. So I guess, I have to include Provisional government of Kierensky among Communist invented myths?
Now, about the Communist propaganda claimed that Americans started the invasion in France in September 1944, the eight months before the end of the war and when Soviet troops have beaten Germans in Russia and taking the Warsaw. It must be that I got deceived and that Americans engaged a large part of German army on the Western front in the beginning of 1943. It would explain why Russians were able to win the decisive battle of Kursk (July 1943). The reason which was hidden from students in Communist controlled schools was that most of German troops were withdrawn to the West to fight US army in France. Now I understand.
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.
[
Top
|
Latest Posts
|
Latest Articles
|
Self Search
|
Add Bookmark
|
Post
|
Abuse
|
Help!
]
FreeRepublic , LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 Forum Version 2.0a Copyright © 1999 Free Republic, LLC |