Reply With QuoteI doubt it. Anybody with more than two brain cells firing already knows it's no threat to Russia. They'll sucker Barry and his administration into giving them valuable information - and then keep complaining.Originally Posted by Stasi
US to give SM-3 technical data to Russians.
US is ready to share secret information on European missile shield components with Russia. The technical data on SM-3 interceptor should change Russian position on this issue.
In Russian: http://news.rambler.ru/13124795/
I doubt it. Anybody with more than two brain cells firing already knows it's no threat to Russia. They'll sucker Barry and his administration into giving them valuable information - and then keep complaining.
Since "secret" means the US Govt has declared it secret. Not that it is secret in the sense that it is not already known to the Russians through covert/intelligence means. i.e they release "secret data" that isn't effectively a secret at all.
I think this offer was made in the past and it was rejected there is nothing new in it.
Just because you share a SM-3 data does not mean all missile in silos are identical or confirm to that data. Its similar to Russian sharing data on Topol-M for one you are not sure its true and even if it it you are not certain the next lot missile have some differences in them be it decoys or trajectory etc that could alter its potential and they choose not to share it or deny it exists.
What US and Russia needs is a strong legally binding treaty with verification regime like START , Legal Guarantees is what Russia is asking for beyond that its just talks for the sake of talks and we know in past legal gurantees have worked be it the START treaty or old ABM treaty
wth is wrong with usa today?
they give all secret's to russia, maybe it's this Obama , oh i hope he'll never win again
Well, now the US has the prerogative to move ahead with its plans irregardless of how much the Russian government bitches about it.
US government is putting out all the nonensical stuff out through the media that they know will not move any further in the tangle and then they would say look we did this and the russians didnt agree , so we are the generous party and they are the non-cooperative.
Any thing thats does not have any legally binding agreement will not move forward an inch , they can share all the data they want that is pretty much meaningless without a legally binding treaty or agreement.
Complain, Complain and complain.
Well think for yourself had START not been a legally binding agreement accepted by both government , neither would have the US trusted Soviets/Russians nor vice verse ......it would have just been a piece of promise not backed by legal agreement and considering the Russian and US do not trust each other more often then not it would have not succeeded.
There is nothing terribly earth shattering that Russians are asking any ways , the US is saying the same thing as the Russians want to hear it just does not want to make what it says as a legal treaty.
This.....X2
Seriously, if America wants the Russian's to stop bitching about it, sign the damn waver already that it is not aimed at them. With USA not signing it, they are just making it obvious to the world who it is aimed at (even if it will not turn the tide).
And the Canadian appears.
And someone with nothing to add is already here.
Please, add something to this thread besides something off topic or nothing constructive?
Agreeing with people and simple reiteration of previous posts, really does blow me away. I'm waiting on the day you actually contribute to the forum. SM3 isn't an offensive weapon, it isn't aimed at anyone. The same people who would scoff at it and call it a piece of ****, are now complaining about it to ridiculous lengths.
Any defensive system has the ability to degrade offensive system or in aid in first strike at the opponent , all this talk of its not an offensive system is useless in the light of the background that the same defensive system for decades was covered by ABM treaty. If ABM did not tilt the strategic offensive potential they wuldnt have had the ABM treaty in place and restriction in number of interceptors.If US does says it does not threaten Russian Offensive system in any way why are they so shy to sign a legal agreement after all they are saying these things again and again.
They likely see it as bowing down, it's chest puffing by both sides but a first strike system it is not. Russia operates enough theater ballistic missiles that the system if not deployed in a sizable number, would be overwhelmed just as if it was on the other side. There is no bid for Moscow, there isn't going to be some massive push under the cover of the SM3. It's cold war light, you know nothing of the real dealings nor do I. Too many members act like they are somehow involved in it, speculation and bold news headlines is all you will get.
Posting Permissions
