Russia's president Vladimir Putin has warned that US plans to build a missile defence system in eastern Europe would force Moscow to target its weapons against sites in the west.

The threat, voiced in an interview with Italy's Corriere della Sera and other foreign media, marked one of Putin's most strident statements to date against the US plans and came just days before he is to join other leaders at a Group of Eight summit in Germany.

In the interview, Putin was asked whether the US move build a missile defence shield in eastern Europe would compel Moscow to direct its own missiles at locations and US military sites in western Europe, as during the Cold War.
"Naturally, yes," Putin said, according to Corriere. "If the American nuclear potential grows in European territory, we have to give ourselves new targets in Europe.

"It is up to our military to define these targets, in addition to defining the choice between ballistic and cruise missiles. But this is just a technical aspect."

It was unclear what Putin was referring to when talking about new targets in Europe. Russia has not overtly targeted Europe since signing a series of agreements with the US and European nations in the 1990s on not directing its missiles against specific countries, according to Pavel Felgenhauer, an independent military analyst based in Moscow.
He added, however, that that was simply a technical matter, since a missile can be given a target within minutes.


Previously, some Russian military officials have said Moscow could aim Russian weapons at Europe-based missile systems.

The US made a formal request in January to place a radar base in a military area south-west of Prague, Czech Republic, and 10 interceptor missiles in neighbouring Poland as part of plans for a missile defence shield that Washington says would protect against a potential threat from Iran.

The plans have brought a strong reaction from Russia, which accuses the US of threatening Russian territory and of trying to start a new arms race.
The G8 summit from Wednesday to Friday at the Baltic Sea resort of Heiligendamm will bring together leaders of the US, Britain, Canada, Germany, France, Italy, Russia, and Japan.

just found this and thought what if ?

Arms races are often the causes of new military technology, We dont need a more devastating WMD.

Since when is self defence an offence.

This is sort of similar to an Army amassing in surrounding countries. Of course your gonna prepare defensive and persuasive measures.

oh i never thought of it that way thats interesting

Rather strong talk form someone who's in command of a minor power any more...a power that wouldn'd be at all if not for the United States.

Putin is ex-KGB. He's a dangerous man, and a blow hard. He has no power over the United States, and he knows it. The U.S. will take prudent steps to defend itself, especially in a post 9-11 world. Putin has managed to paint himself as somewhat of a renegade, which may be a very unwise position to take, given his actual level of power anymore. He wants to re-create the Soviet Union, which is not a step that will benefit his economically challeged country, nor his own self-interest.

He may well find himself challenged by his own people, which likely wouldn't be a bad thing...

AS I've stated elsewhere, Russia is only concerned about their share of the weapons market. If this shield goes on line and can actually stop their best stuff, they'll play hell trying to sell their goods to third world nations.

When you don't know why they are mad adn there is no logical reason for them to be mad, it probably has something to do with money.

I asked my dad last night. About the cold war was just building up weapons. And he said yes. I wasn't listening to the news while eating dinner. I was more worried about getting food in my stomach. ^^;;

gw bush is the most dangerous man on the planet...I couldnt even compare putin to him...because he doesnt want a missle shield in his backyard ..btw which will benefit us defense companies..he's dangerous..

all these replies are very good and interesting

It's amazing how many times I hear this statement about President Bush being the most dangerous man on the planet.
Do you know the restrictions on Presidential power?
Do you know that a missile shield is a defensive construct (as opposed to "offensive"), prudently placed because practical men see a threat in the Putin fellow, who would actually love to re-fire the Soviet Union's engine...if he could?
Do you know that defense is a primary responsibility of the President of the United States?

How does executing his Constitutional duties make him dangerous?

p.s....if it benefits U.S. defense contractors, what is the problem with that?

That is an excellent point, and likely true in this case.
Putin would certainly be interested in money wherever he could get it.

creating a new arms race for profit; is his constitutional duty?...who's he protecting us from?...an invisible enemy...neither Iran or n korea have nuclear weapons...so who's the missile shield for?...

Why is Russia worried about it?

Did you read what I told you?
It is of course Korea and Iran, both of whom are attempting overtly to procure these weapons. Why do you think Putin would be upset with a Missile shield against Korea and Iran? Duh....

It doesn't matter that they don't yet have them. We know full well that they are attempting to get them. Having the defenses in place to knock them down before they ever get out of the countries is certainly better than simply blowing the countries up...don't you think? And who do you think is financially interested in North Korea and Iran?


An arms race for profit? By God, you spew left wing talking points like nobody's business.
It's not about "arms races". There are no arms races. It's about national and international defense against those who want to do things that are no-nos in the modern world.

how do you know they are procuring these weapons? because bush told you?...didnt he tell you saddam had 160 tons of WMD...dont you ever learn...it's just fear propoganda..

I'm sure N. Korea just tested a very large firecracker.

they test fired a missle that fell in the ocean...they have no nukes...your just being fed this stuff; so the missle shield for profit can be built..

This is a very wise statement, can apply in a variety of circumstances as well.

Intelligence. We know they are attempting to develop these weapons. Not that they have them. And, that is enough to respond to.
It's common knowledge, and it is admitted by those attempting to do so.





Intelligenece, again. Intelligence told Bush. Bush told everyone, and everyone relied on the intelligence. Everyone.


Warnings about Hitler were taken as fear propaganda too in the 1930s. Big mistake.
We know Saddam had WMD. We also know he used WMD. Just because we didn't find them immediately doesn't mean he didn't have them, and of course, we did find evidence of them in several locations subsequently. The case regarding WMDs in Iraq is closed.

Far too many people equate the WMD issue with the actual problem we have in Iraq. The mis-management of Iraq (vis-a-vis an over-estimation of the Iraqi's capabilities to get it together and take care of themselves, and a post-victory strategy) is unrelated to the rationale for going in. They had WMDs, they were a threat to the United States, and that war was won in short order. It's the peace that we're fighting over now...as well as the war on terror, who's main front is Iraq...something that we didn't plan for, certainly, but which fell into place.

We're there. That's where the main battle is, and that's where we have to win before moving on. It could've, and should've been different, perhaps, but we are left with what we have, and republicans and democrats alike believed the intelligence that sent us there.


However, Iran and North Korea's nuclear plans are not faulty intel. They are factual things. A missile shield is bad how?

neither us has power over russia, never will, never had

Oh I see...

And the Soviet Union just happened to dissolve all by itself, eh? There was a power there that dissolved it. And that same power helped to solidify the current Russian country.
Do you have any idea who was instrumental in that?

ok, i'll have to apolagize for this post, since it was vodka talking more than me, but ussr fell apart, for economic reasons, not military defeat, and yes, america did solidify russia after ussr fell apart, economicly, military wise us, and russia, are pretty capable of defending themselves, and equaly capable, destroing each other, neither one is afraid of another, us has power thru dollar, not thru military, in regards to russia of course.

It seems that the hopes for a new cold war have been dashed. Putin agreed to stop threatening to target missiles at Europe if the U.S. agrees to include Azerbajan in the shield. It now seems that is all they wanted in the first place, a defence against the weapons that we have asked them for years not to sell.

You know at the end of the day, our planet is going to be full of defense and offense weapons in an attempt to 'protect' ourselves from each other. That is a sad state of affairs...

It already is a sad state of affairs...

USSR fell apart for alot of reasons, none of which had to do with military defeat. That's why we called it a cold war. Calling it "economic reasons" is true in one respect, but that doesn't address the true complexity behind the collapse, which involved political and social forces, and careful pressure from the outside. It was a totalitarian regime which had matured as far as any such regime can go before falling apart rather naturally. It failed because all such regimes are destined to do so, once it's people wake up and smell the coffee, as-it-were.