Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Captain Risky

Trump ends nuclear arms treaty [merged]

52 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Captain Risky

Trump says US is ending decades-old nuclear arms treaty with Russia

Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump announced Saturday that the US is pulling out of the landmark Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty with Russia, a decades-old agreement that has drawn the ire of the President. 

"Russia has violated the agreement. They've been violating it for many years," Trump told reporters before boarding Air Force One to leave Nevada following a campaign rally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor

Doing stuff like this kinda makes it hard to pressure North Korea and Iran to end nuclear weapons programs.  But who are we kidding, Russia was never following it and I have serious doubts that we stopped research into intermediate range deliver systems either- you know, for alternative payloads <wink, wink>.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Risky
8 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

Doing stuff like this kinda makes it hard to pressure North Korea and Iran to end nuclear weapons programs.  But who are we kidding, Russia was never following it and I have serious doubts that we stopped research into intermediate range deliver systems either- you know, for alternative payloads <wink, wink>.

good for Russia now that its gonna cost America more money to create and deploy a capability to protect an alliance that isn't pulling its weight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
21 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

good for Russia now that its gonna cost America more money to create and deploy a capability to protect an alliance that isn't pulling its weight.

Really?  You think increased tensions and a renewed nuclear arms competition is a positive for the world?  Or is it just another chance to kick uncle sam in the nuts that you enjoy?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Risky
50 minutes ago, and then said:

Really?  You think increased tensions and a renewed nuclear arms competition is a positive for the world?  Or is it just another chance to kick uncle sam in the nuts that you enjoy?

hang on there mate. I'm not kicking anyone in the goolies. just saying its an added cost and concern. not thats its positive. thats all brother. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener

Well, it appears that China has been developing intermediate range ballistic missiles, because it isn't a signatory to the agreement. 

Now Russia has been breaching the agreement since at least 2008 (according to the NATO secretary general). 

So what is the POINT in the USA continuing to abide by it ? It just puts the USA at a disadvantage.

President Trump is doing exactly the right thing. 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
Quote

The US will withdraw from a landmark nuclear weapons treaty with Russia, President Donald Trump has confirmed.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45930206

There are no words anymore for this cowardly, faithless administration. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter
7 minutes ago, Setton said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45930206

There are no words anymore for this cowardly, faithless administration. 

Already being covered here

 

Also Russia has been violating the treaty for almost a decade, the Obama administration even called Russia out on violating it so why stay in a treaty the other side isnt following

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
3 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

Already being covered here

 

Also Russia has been violating the treaty for almost a decade, the Obama administration even called Russia out on violating it so why stay in a treaty the other side isnt following

Because it's stopped a repeat of the cold War for decades? 

And if another party isn't adhering to such an important treaty, an adult renegotiates if possible. 

A child stomps off in a sulk and leaves everyone else to clean up the mess. 

Anyway, thanks for linking to the other thread. Not sure how I missed it. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
1 minute ago, Setton said:

Because it's stopped a repeat of the cold War for decades? 

And if another party isn't adhering to such an important treaty, an adult renegotiates if possible. 

A child stomps off in a sulk and leaves everyone else to clean up the mess. 

Anyway, thanks for linking to the other thread. Not sure how I missed it. 

I guess you think what Obama did was an "adult" approach to diplomacy?  What behaviors did Iran moderate as a result?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
41 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Well, it appears that China has been developing intermediate range ballistic missiles, because it isn't a signatory to the agreement. 

Now Russia has been breaching the agreement since at least 2008 (according to the NATO secretary general). 

So what is the POINT in the USA continuing to abide by it ? It just puts the USA at a disadvantage.

President Trump is doing exactly the right thing. 

Renegotiating, or at least attempting to, would be the right thing. Just walking away from it is yet another example of the US in recent years refusing to accept responsibility for its past decisions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
2 minutes ago, and then said:

I guess you think what Obama did was an "adult" approach to diplomacy?  What behaviors did Iran moderate as a result?

More adult at least. Doesn’t mean it'll always work but with this approach there is NO chance it will have a good outcome. 

Also - whataboutism. Don't you have any thoughts on the topic actually at hand? 

Edited by Setton
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Waspie_Dwarf
14 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

Already being covered here

 

Threads now merged.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
8 minutes ago, Setton said:

Renegotiating, or at least attempting to, would be the right thing. Just walking away from it is yet another example of the US in recent years refusing to accept responsibility for its past decisions. 

I don't think so Setton. China wasn't a member of it, but it was estimated that 95% of its nuclear arsenal would be in breach of it if it was. 

Russia abandoned it 10 years ago. 

What is the POINT of remaining in it ? Any negotiations could be done just as well with America in, or out, of it. 

What Donald Trump has done is to face reality, and to react to it. He's sent a message to Putin that the USA won't just lie down and be walked all over. 

Good for him !

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter
11 minutes ago, Setton said:

Because it's stopped a repeat of the cold War for decades? 

And if another party isn't adhering to such an important treaty, an adult renegotiates if possible. 

A child stomps off in a sulk and leaves everyone else to clean up the mess. 

Anyway, thanks for linking to the other thread. Not sure how I missed it. 

Had a response typed out and submitted it when these got merged and it seems to of disappeared.

To essentially repeat what I originally typed

How much the treaty stopped an arms race for decades is debatable.  The treaty literally only limited a very specific weapon, ground launched cruise missiles with a range between 500 km and 5000 km, sea launched and air launched cruise missiles of those ranges could still be developed and converting them from sea or air launch to ground launch wouldnt take very long.  All the treaty could really do was delay Russia and America from getting ground launched cruise missiles with those ranges if either country really wanted them.

Even then the bigger problem is the treaty literally only involved Russia and America so out of all of the countries in the world only two could develop ground launched cruise missiles with a range between 500 km and 5000 km while everyone else could and one of the nations has been violating the treaty.

As for mess to clean up there simply isnt any, the treaty was essentially worthless and didnt really do much of anything then temporarily two countries from having a weapon system if either country really wanted it.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter

For some perspective the tomahawk cruise missile has a range between 1300 km and 2500 km and can be launched from a plain or from a horizontal submarine torpedo tube.  Does anyone doubt America couldn't develop a ground launched system, which would of violated this treaty, in under a week.

Edited by DarkHunter
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Helen of Annoy
1 hour ago, RoofGardener said:

I don't think so Setton. China wasn't a member of it, but it was estimated that 95% of its nuclear arsenal would be in breach of it if it was. 

Russia abandoned it 10 years ago. 

What is the POINT of remaining in it ? Any negotiations could be done just as well with America in, or out, of it. 

What Donald Trump has done is to face reality, and to react to it. He's sent a message to Putin that the USA won't just lie down and be walked all over. 

Good for him !

Exactly the opposite. Trump just sent the message Putin wants from him: that Russia can install all they want, especially to reach Europe and that US won't do anything about it. 

He will also create an excuse for wasting endless amount of American money on realistically unneeded new missiles, since those already existing are more than enough to exterminate us all.  

The funniest part is that the treaty in question was Reagan's achievement, welcomed even by those who didn't share his political views.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Caspian Hare
4 hours ago, Gromdor said:

Doing stuff like this kinda makes it hard to pressure North Korea and Iran to end nuclear weapons programs.  But who are we kidding, Russia was never following it and I have serious doubts that we stopped research into intermediate range deliver systems either- you know, for alternative payloads <wink, wink>.

The INF treaty is obsolete in the post-Cold War world. It's obsolete for Russia as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Caspian Hare
2 hours ago, Setton said:

Because it's stopped a repeat of the cold War for decades? 

And if another party isn't adhering to such an important treaty, an adult renegotiates if possible. 

A child stomps off in a sulk and leaves everyone else to clean up the mess. 

Anyway, thanks for linking to the other thread. Not sure how I missed it. 

No, it didn't. The most important thing that the INF treaty did was to eliminate Pershing 2 missiles which, from their sites in Western Europe, were destabilizing because they could hit Soviet command and control sites in the Western USSR with a flight time of about 12 to 15 minutes, before the USSR could launch a response. The treaty accepted the logic of mutually assured destruction by giving up a US capability that made a successful first strike seem plausible.

That world order is gone now and the treaty makes no sense. Arbitrarily banning a category of weapons, especially when Russia has other potential threats (China) accomplishes nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Caspian Hare
41 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

Exactly the opposite. Trump just sent the message Putin wants from him: that Russia can install all they want, especially to reach Europe and that US won't do anything about it. 

He will also create an excuse for wasting endless amount of American money on realistically unneeded new missiles, since those already existing are more than enough to exterminate us all.  

The funniest part is that the treaty in question was Reagan's achievement, welcomed even by those who didn't share his political views.  

What? They can already reach Europe. Russia should be able to build weapons in this category if they see fit to. There's no reason you can't continue arms control without this treaty. You can cap total weapons or delivery systems without arbitrarily outlawing of a whole category. Short range weapons okay, long range weapons okay, medium-range weapons verboten makes no sense in the post-Cold War world.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Caspian Hare
4 hours ago, Captain Risky said:

good for Russia now that its gonna cost America more money to create and deploy a capability to protect an alliance that isn't pulling its weight.

If they develop anything new now it will probably be a conventional IRBM of some kind. With modern guidance systems this would be very useful.

Our army was just talking about creating a very-long range artillery system as a legal means of getting around this very treaty. The shells would have cost more than missiles of the same range. Drones, cruise missiles and extended-range artillery were all being used to bypass this treaty. Those expensive workaround solutions aren't necessary any more.

Edited by The Caspian Hare
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Helen of Annoy
1 hour ago, The Caspian Hare said:

What? They can already reach Europe. Russia should be able to build weapons in this category if they see fit to. There's no reason you can't continue arms control without this treaty. You can cap total weapons or delivery systems without arbitrarily outlawing of a whole category. Short range weapons okay, long range weapons okay, medium-range weapons verboten makes no sense in the post-Cold War world.

 

Yes, I know what they can reach. To my endless schadenfreude, I'm not their primary target. The morons who applaud this latest cowardly insanity are. 

Anyway, the point is not if there already is something in place, the point is obviously if more can be added with or without at least formal obstacles. 

Like I said, but since it's important I will repeat: most obviously, Trump continues to serve Putin. The US has its nuclear grid in place, it's Russia that's installing more, in accordance to their expansionist plans. Trump just made sure there are no grounds for legal complaints against it. 

 

The moral of the story is that yes, Cold War is over. Russia won. Everyone needs new, direct agreements with Russia, not just bypassing but ignoring the **** out of US. 

And this latest criminal insanity will also open way for the repulsive little NK **** and his nuclear ambitions. Not to mention Trump has Sauds to sell nuclear weapons to. They'll thank him with more donations for the first daughter and possibly dismembering few more journalists.     

  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Caspian Hare
1 hour ago, Helen of Annoy said:

Yes, I know what they can reach. To my endless schadenfreude, I'm not their primary target. The morons who applaud this latest cowardly insanity are. 

Anyway, the point is not if there already is something in place, the point is obviously if more can be added with or without at least formal obstacles. 

Like I said, but since it's important I will repeat: most obviously, Trump continues to serve Putin. The US has its nuclear grid in place, it's Russia that's installing more, in accordance to their expansionist plans. Trump just made sure there are no grounds for legal complaints against it. 

 

The moral of the story is that yes, Cold War is over. Russia won. Everyone needs new, direct agreements with Russia, not just bypassing but ignoring the **** out of US. 

And this latest criminal insanity will also open way for the repulsive little NK **** and his nuclear ambitions. Not to mention Trump has Sauds to sell nuclear weapons to. They'll thank him with more donations for the first daughter and possibly dismembering few more journalists.     

  

You're not making any sense. Serves Putin? Russia's been pushing against the envelope of this treaty since at least 2012, legal constraints and all. But this is not really about Russia. This has more to do with the rise of China which is under no such constraints and more generally  the demise of the Cold War bipolar world order. The treaty is a relic of a bygone era.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener

All of the last few posters are reinforcing the point... President Donald Trump has - once again - recognised bull**** in the international "treaties", and called them out for what they are. 

He is not "walking away", he is recognising that other countries are cheating on the accords, and have rendered them obsolete. He is repositioning the USA to renegotiate these agreements. 

Unlike any other president since.... dunno.. 2008 ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Helen of Annoy
25 minutes ago, The Caspian Hare said:

You're not making any sense. Serves Putin? Russia's been pushing against the envelope of this treaty since at least 2012, legal constraints and all. But this is not really about Russia. This has more to do with the rise of China which is under no such constraints and more generally  the demise of the Cold War bipolar world order. The treaty is a relic of a bygone era.

 

Aha, it's me that makes no sense, not the president Reek of Helsinki. 

And that 'bygone era' is currently occupying a chunk of Ukraine, eyeballing Baltic, pushing the West out of ME, undermining NATO, attempting to destroy the EU...    

Any remotely sane person and administration would indeed notice there's China too with their arsenal and immediately start including them into treaties too. It might be a challenge, but at least they don't allow the challenged ones to make such decisions for them.  

It's China that worries you? Well, with Trump letting it all go, causing Russians to speed up openly adding to their arsenal, what the **** you think China will do? 

 

7 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

All of the last few posters are reinforcing the point... President Donald Trump has - once again - recognised bull**** in the international "treaties", and called them out for what they are. 

He is not "walking away", he is recognising that other countries are cheating on the accords, and have rendered them obsolete. He is repositioning the USA to renegotiate these agreements. 

Unlike any other president since.... dunno.. 2008 ? 

Trump is walking away, irresponsibly as usual, and if he 'renegotiates' this one, it will be his first. Because every other treaty or agreement he destroyed was not replaced yet, and possible new deals look worse for the US.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.