From what I know, I believe you are right. Tactical NUKES anyway (nuclear artillary).

Even that might not be enough today (to be honest, I have only the vaguest idea of our current capability...or lack thereof...in this area).

I would dearly love to find out we have it handled...and that there is no reason to worry.. But, then, I'd also dearly love to learn the "Denver Broncos*" had a capable defense this season too. :D.

[*an "American Football" team--NFL]


CS

Yeah, also SRBM's and aircraft delivered stuff.

Without them we were looking at a 10-1 and worse Soviet/Nato superiority in most conventional forces and the quality difference back then wasn't nearly as pronounced as it is today.

Right. Are you a part of Nato?

An old 82nd cadance comes to mind...

"Hey Mother Russia.... you'd better behave....

Gonna fill your skies with maroon beret..."

bah! ...all this political posturing... just put 'em over the DZ already! :arrgh!:

NATO is not a part of our Constitution. ;) And Russia need not go to war to exert alot of influence and pressure over your security and economic interests. I don't believe an Obama administration will do anything on your behalf.

There is a little difference with applying pressure...and beeing successful in applying pressure.

1st of all, perspective:
Iskander (SS-26) is not the "OMFG teh end of teh world nuke" missile.
It is a conventional short range theater ballistic missile, basically the grandson of the Scud.
A nuke warhead is optional, but currently all Iskanders are conventional.
The US Army has a similar weapon, the MGM-140 ATACMs, which was liberally used in Iraq 2003.
These weapons have a small CEP and could take out both the Silos and the Radar with conventional warheads.
So basically, Russia is moving around 30-60 2000 pound unitary or cluster bombs to Kaliningrad. The only difference between these and air dropped bombs is that their carrier system can't be shot down that easily.
The Iskander is maybe the best theater ballistic missile in its class in the world, but it is currently neither a nuclear nor a long ranged missile system.
Iskander could be turned into something like the SS-20, but not on the field.
Missiles of such range, like Tochka, have always been stationed in Kaliningrad, only those have a much larger CEP.
Iskander was originally developed as a division level artillery missile, same as Scud or Tochka.
Now they're deployed in seperate battalions largely because there are not enough of them to equip all russian divisions and also they make a nice boogeyrocket. Iskander is a propaganda ploy and a remarkable archievement in rocket science in one....

Secondly, Russia is announcing that it would do that if negotiations over the BMD system fail.
They're not implementing this move right now. Sometimes I feel people in the media actually want war.

And don't get me started with the Poles. Actually the poles I know are quite OK but the country's Government and Media are certainly getting on my nerves with their eternal living in the past.
I love history but for the poles it seems mostly a tool for nationalism, not to mention their rather "creative" approach to it, like mostly forgetting to mention they did not beat the Turks all by themselves at Vienna or that their army failed to take the Marienburg after Grunwald.
Also their eternal hatred for Germans and Russians, their eternal sabotage of the EU, their constant biting the hand that feeds them.
It was basically us who helped them get back on their feet after 1991, and what did we get for it? Constant spitting in the face.
We gave them our remaining MiG-29s plus a hundred Leopard 2s for 1 Euro the same year Poland elected a government campaigning on racial hatred against Germans.
So, we had wars in the past, so what? France regularly turned western Germany into a desert every 20 years until 1815 (and we invaded them three times more recently) and we still get along today, as we do with Belgium and the Netherlands.


Actually all of eastern europe is getting on my nerves with their moronic ultranationalism.
Who cares if the newly independend republic of ****holistan has a 10.000 year old unique culture which makes them better than their hated neighbours in Molvania?
This place allready got us one world war for sure, and the second one had its roots there as well.

You guys in the EU have no leverage to stop a Russia intent on reasserting themselves. And you have other major problems ahead as well. Like the Muslim population outbreeding you there. Without US support, and support in actions, you guys are gonna be hurting. In response to AntEater, Russia can say whatever they want to comfort your souls. They got you by the rocks buddy. Without a US administration that can stand up to these guys, you guys may be on the verge of seeing Russia exerting major influence in your world. And it won't be friendly.

Do Americans reproduce themselves if not for immigration and birth rate of recent immigrants?
It is not Joe the Plumber who keeps the birthrate up but Jose' the Plumber.
Though I'd take Latinos over Turks any day (maybe because I don't know that many) judging from forum posts here, these people are as alien to US culture as muslims are to ours, despite what Obama might say.

And with the Muslims, I think I know which superpower we have to thank for them....
Also, what is so inherently bad abour Russia reasserting itself.
It is not the soviet union, it is Russia.
We've been living with them for a thousand years and a majority of the time we were not at war.
Russia might not be a superpower, but it certainly is a huge nation which has a certain influence.
A Europe without Russia is like a europe without Germany or France. Some people might like it that way, but they're here and we have to deal with them.
What would be your plan for that country?
Brezinky's plan of causing civil war and divide it up into dozens of ****holes for easy control?
Actually that would cause more death and destruction than any major european war.
I don't understand that silly confrontation course, and don't give me democracy.
I don't see any kind of such hostility against Saudi Arabia. Not even against China.
The US needs China, so they shut up about China.
US needs Saud-Arabia, so they shut up about that muslim variant of North Korea
Europe needs Russia, so we shut up about Russia.
Not to mention that compared to both, Russia is quite harmless.
Gary Kasparov would've been paraded around in a stadium with a wooden sign around his neck and then shot in China. In SA he would've lost his head.


Also, quit whining about european weakness. Just because we don't run around bragging with our military like adolescent boys doesn't mean we don't have any.
In a major european war, the fighting and dying would be up to the europeans, just as it would've been in the cold war, despite Tom Clancy portraying only US units
West Germany alone would've fielded over a million men after mobilization.

But isn't the pravda anachronistic loo paper anyway? Some quotes from, er, pravda.
:cough:
:facepalm:
USA, this is what you see when you look into the mirror. Not very eloquent with those miserable nazi comparisons, but in principle here you can read what they think about you, without a filter.

Good that it ends on a more agreeable note:
Like many of our former enemy countries, their relation to Hitler seems almost sexually motivated.
That's what you should try and understand before you take the article apart. I hope they can be taken more seriously at the end and that antisemitic nazi Satan drivel at the beginning can be attributed to just lack of intelligence.

AntEater,

:yep:

The Poles abuse the umbrella of their NATO membership for trying to straighten some bills with the Russians, by provoking them where they can and pokingthem in their backs with a pencil. That is not what NATO is there for. Warzaw finally should get a clear Western bashing for not stopping to do so childishly and narrow-minded.

Those people who now feel provoked by Russian missiles in the Kaliningrad enclave now experience how it feels from the Russian side with the Western plans for that missile system in Poland and the Czech republik. And the russians wanted to acchieve that effect, else they would not have chosen that isolated enclave, but some territory attached to the Russian mainland. It is an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. and once again: they have said they would react to the american plans, sooner or later. we would do the same, if we were in their place.

This does not mean that their demand to be seen as a global power on same eye level with the US isn't a bit exaggerated. The west heavily depends on Russia, for cooperation in the UN (Iran, etc), and energy. but the russians do not have the ability to actively manouver around all the globe and project military power at will like america can. However, just ignoring them and dealing with them as haughty and arrogant as over the past 15 years, does not work, for that they are too strong a regional power on quite a bit of the planet's surface. Leave them in their sphere of influence and avoid useless provokations over nothing but the question who has the longer one. Accepting them to play their opera costs us nothing, but eventually earns us their good will in cooperation in international issues (of which their are so damn many that the West alone cannot solve them), so smile and clap your hands and accept to spend some flattery on them. that they cannot or do not wish to contribute to those mentioned internantional issues does not mean that we necessarily can have progress in these fields against them. Regarding the Kaukasus, that's their playground, not Washingtons, like Kanada or Mexico is not the Russian's playground, so leave them alone there. And Saakashvilistan - is not worth to mess up our relations with Russia for it, the government there is autocratic, supressive, it lied, betrayed and commited the same warcrimes it accused the russians of, so to hell with it. Regarding Ukraine, we should try to influence both sides to not using military force over their differences, but we should not allow the Ukraine into NATO. Beyond that, we should leave the issues to the two of them. Poland and the Baltic, despite all the hysteria by some, in no way I can see to be at risk.

Stupid article. That's all it is. Consider the source. There's so much stupidity in it, there's really no place to begin chopping it up. It is one of the most idiotic analysis of the USA that I have ever seen.

Did you just hear that today, there is some talks in Russia that maybe Mr. Putin could become President again? It's not the Soviet Union, but there is an aura of totalitarianism rearing it's ugly head there. The funny yet sad thing is, you are oblivious and in denial to some of the dangers you guys are confronting. Not just with Russian missiles, potential Iranian nukes, or Muslim influence in your governments (sharia in the future for you??) with their exploding populations, but with your own deflating ability to protect your own interests..... in conjunction with a reassertive Russia knocking on the door. You think that if we remove our missile defenses and radars and leave European soil, the Russians are going to remove their missiles, leave you alone, and you will all live happily ever after. I wouldn't bet the bank on it. I know the template you guys in Europe use is America is at fault for everything (a very lazy view actually), but for the life of me, have you seen how Putin and Co. has interjected himself into the affairs of sovereign nations near you? And he's moving closer in influence and hard power to your homes. Some of you Euro's need to wake the hell up and at least show some state of vigilance. Especially since now I find it unlikely the USA will be in a position to help you much. The new administration, if I take him at his words, has no interest in pursuing conflict in any region for any reason. Sitting at the negotiation table with no pre-conditions is our new foreign policy I'm afraid. A guy like Putin will regrettably chew up an administration like this.

This "Putin takes power" is simply BS, as far as I can see. Medvedev is certainly not playing bad cop like he does to give up the playing field prematurely. He just tries to assert himself as the tough guy. Hardly a move if you plan on leaving office in a year.
Maybe Putin will run after Medvedev's term is over, who knows?

So even IF Russia is totalitarian and whatnot, what do you think it wants from western Europe?
Annex territory? Certainly not. The most extreme thing imaginable would be to restore the soviet border, but even that would mean neither Poland nor the CR or anyone else except the Baltics would be annexed. But the baltic states are in NATO so it would be pretty suicidal anyway.
Belarus wants to be annexed but Russia doesn't want to at the moment.
The eastern half of Ukraine wouldn't mind either. The western half would mind, though.
Not even Vladimir Zhirinovsky wants to march on Warsaw, much less on Berlin or Prague.
"Regime change"? Unlikely, but it could be possible that Moscow tries to meddle in our affairs the same way the US does now for ages: By cultivating politicians, who act as some kind of proxies for US interests. Russians could do the same, sure, but even the influence of those US trojan donkeys is somewhat limited.
Economic blackmail? As many have posted, the relationship is mutual. In pure monetary terms, Germany exports more to Russia than Russia exports to Germany.
Its mostly industrial goods versus natural resources.
Russia needs an industrial base and western Europe can provide that with expertise and industrial manufacturing. I've worked for companies in russian business and I can tell you, they're tough, but they are not as terribly arrogant as the Chinese and they won't screw you over by reverse engineering your stuff overnight like the Chinese.
Doing industrial construction in Russia is a sound long term strategy, while doing the same in China is economic suicide.
If russia turns of the gas, Europe can't provide Russia with the industry it needs to provide Russians with a higher standard of living. And THAT is the benchmark by which the russian voter (yes, the Russians actually still voted for Putin and Medvedev) makes his decisions.
Those two are so popular because they raised the living standard for the average russian. If they fail on doing that, they will lose power.

Problem is, Politicians and media talk like this is the cold war, while in reality, Russia kind of belongs to the same economic circle as Europe. In fact, Poland and the Baltics would be pretty screwed if not for the Russian trade.

Btw, with the immigrant problem, I agree with you, it was a shortsighted policy by european leaders and something needs to be done about it. On the other hand, birthrate both in muslim countries and in immigrant communities is declining as well, so the time window of "outbreeding" might be shorter than the jihadis hope for.


- Still feeling like casting pearls before swine. I think some posters here are simply unable to comprehend anything more complicated that "Russia baaaaad, 'Murka goooood".-

Well, bottom line, they want to dominate the sphere of influence over your area of the world. And in a way they already have some of that. The wildcard is you guys have always had US support to temper any kind of ambition from turning into something more. I hope it's not the case, but our new administration looks like it's not the kind that deals with this level of confrontation very effectively or at all. In this environment, who knows what kind of concessions or "deals" they might want with you. They do have an unbalanced leverage with you now. And unfortunately totalitarian models of governments have never played "nice". As such, the more these people get in concessions from you, the more they will want. Doesn't need to go to the war model. If you think that 21st century totalitarianism is any different from any other era, you're kidding yourself.

It wouldn't surprise me one bit if the US backed down and pulled the idea of a defense shield out of Poland completely. Wouldn't bother me either. Put the shield around the US, let everyone else develop their own if they need one.