Posted on 08/02/2019 7:41:33 PM PDT by where's_the_Outrage?
The US has formally withdrawn from a key nuclear treaty with Russia, raising fears of a new arms race.
The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) was signed by US President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1987.
It banned missiles with ranges between 500 and 5,500 km (310-3,400 miles).
But earlier this year the US and Nato accused Russia of violating the pact by deploying a new type of cruise missile, which Moscow has denied.
The Americans said they had evidence that Russia had deployed a number of 9M729 missiles - known to Nato as SSC-8. This accusation was then put to Washington's Nato allies, which all backed the US claim.
"Russia is solely responsible for the treaty's demise," Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said in a statement on Friday.
"With the full support of our Nato allies, the United States has determined Russia to be in material breach of the treaty, and has subsequently suspended our obligations under the treaty," he added.
Russia's foreign ministry confirmed the INF treaty was "formally dead" in a statement carried by state-run Ria Novosti news agency.
(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.com ...
It made sense in 1950s and 1960s with air raids and ICBMs and related time to issue warning.
The point of INF is to shorten that time so you won’t have time to get under the desk:)
My issue with most reporting on this is the claim that Trump ended a treaty with Russia.
No, Trump ended a treaty with the Soviet Union, which does not exist anymore, so the Russians were not wrongly breaking a treaty. As far as they were concerned, it had no validity. If we wanted to keep limiting ourselves by it, the Russians (Putin) weren’t going to verbally stop us.
We should have ended the treaty years ago especially after the Ruskies invaded Crimea and Georgia. But we had a couple of goofball Presidents then.
There is a different prospective with this. The INF Treaty was mostly to protect Europe. The US, while watching the development of this missile, came to view it as one that could travel 2,000 Km (not 400 as advertised by the Russians).
So after pondering upon it....Trump laid down a card. He’ll end the treaty, but I suspect as the six months go by (it’s not immediate), the Europeans will be thinking that Trump will be moving counter-measures or new missiles into NATO/Europe. Well, I suspect that he’ll refuse to participate in some ‘race’ and leave Europe to face the new missile by themselves. In simple terms, this is where the Trump-train steps out of NATO and says handle it yourself.
If Putin were to put some missile system into Cuba or Venezuela? It’d be taken out in less than a week. But I don’t think Putin wants that type of confrontation.
The loser in all of this is the core of NATO....France, Germany, etc. They don’t have the money to protect themselves, and without the US...all this tough-guy rhetoric will have to end shortly.
There’s also the fact that the treaty does not stop China from deploying such missiles.
That’s smoke and mirrors. What Russians did or didn’t with INFs is mostly irrelevant. One thing for sure is they didn’t threaten US with IRBMs.
The reason why US pulling out is because China is not part of the treaty although currently possess the capability to develop and stockpile missiles.
Nobody wants to admit it clearly and for that reason Russian bogeyman appeared again.
I think Russians understand it full well and seeking the way to pull out as well.
It is not really a big deal for them since all they need to counter the potential threat of US IRBMs in Asia and Europe is to get back to Cuba and place theirs there. Venezuela is a nice location for them too and it seems likely to work considering the poor handling of the whole Venezuelan situation by CIA.
I think you are right. That’s the real reason behind the deal pullout.
“” “” If Putin were to put some missile system into Cuba or Venezuela? It’d be taken out in less than a week. But I don’t think Putin wants that type of confrontation.”” “”
LOL. Do you mean taken out in case of conflict? I think it takes minutes not weeks to launch these missiles at their targets.
I meant the week in terms of arguing over the aspects of taking it out, whether the AF or Navy would get the nod, and intel guys arguing over precise coordinate (16 feet to the left, center or right).
You mean an act of aggression against the strategic forces of a country in pocession of a strategic detergent?
That would be quite an escalation but won’t happen in real life.
If that we see in foreign politics to continue there would be Russian missiles in Cuba or Venezuela or both by 2022 but probably sooner. That’s 100%.
Nothing would change it. Congress might even sanction Putin himself off Netflix but it won’t work anyway.
Never trust Russia.
The reaction of the think-tanks and the media is predictable. The USSR/Russia has never complied with the agreement, which is all fine and good. But now that America has pulled out, all of a sudden “we’re closer to war” and “the world is more dangerous place now”. Yep, as usual, the commies are as good as gold and the US is the bad guy in the world driving countries and people to do crazy things.
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.