Saint Barack lectures black men

[webfact]

U.S. would destroy banned Russian warheads if necessary - NATO envoy

By Robin Emmott

 

FILE PHOTO: U.S. Ambassador to NATO Kay Bailey Hutchison briefs the media ahead of a NATO defence ministers meeting at the Alliance headquarters in Brussels, Belgium, October 2, 2018. REUTERS/Francois Lenoir/File Photo

 

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - Russia must halt its covert development of a banned cruise missile system or the United States will seek to destroy it before it becomes operational, Washington's envoy to NATO said on Tuesday.

 

The United States believes Russia is developing a ground-launched system in breach of a Cold War treaty that could allow Russia to launch a nuclear strike on Europe at short notice, but Moscow has consistently denied any such violation.

 

U.S. ambassador to NATO Kay Bailey Hutchison said Washington remained committed to a diplomatic solution but was prepared to consider a military strike if development of the medium-range system continued.

 

"At that point, we would be looking at the capability to take out a (Russian) missile that could hit any of our countries," Hutchison told a news conference.

 

"Counter measures (by the United States) would be to take out the missiles that are in development by Russia in violation of the treaty," she added. "They are on notice."

 

Hutchison later clarified in a tweet that she was not talking about a preemptive strike against Russia. "My point: Russia needs to return to INF Treaty compliance or we will need to match its capabilities to protect US & NATO interests. The current situation, with Russia in blatant violation, is untenable."

 

The 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty bans medium-range missiles capable of hitting Europe or Alaska.

 

In Washington, State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said the United States had for some time argued that Moscow was not in compliance with the treaty.

 

"What Ambassador Hutchison was talking about was improving overall defence and deterrence posture," Nauert told a news conference.

 

"The United States is committed to upholding its arms control obligations and expects Russia to do the very same thing," she said, adding that the U.S. was discussing the issue with its allies.

 

The Russian Foreign Ministry said that such statements were dangerous, and that it would provide detailed answers to Washington.

 

"It seems that people who make such statements do not realise the level of their responsibility and the danger of aggressive rhetoric," TASS news agency quoted spokeswoman Maria Zakharova as saying.

 

In the past, the ministry has said it is ready for talks with the United States to try to preserve the treaty and would comply with its obligations if the United States did.

 

But that same year, the U.S. State Department report found Russia had violated obligations "not to possess, produce, or flight-test" a ground-launched cruise missile with a range capability of 500 km to 5,500 km (310-3,420 miles), "or to possess or produce launchers of such missiles."

 

The U.S. accusations are likely to further strain relations between Moscow and the West that are at a low over Russia's 2014 seizure of Crimea, its bombing campaign in Syria and accusations of meddling in Western elections.

 

"We have been trying to send a message to Russia for several years that we know they are violating the treaty; we have shown Russia the evidence that we have that they are violating the treaty," Hutchison said.

 

"We are laying down the markers so that our allies will help us bring Russia to the table," she added.

 

U.S. Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis said he would discuss the issue with his NATO counterparts at a scheduled two-day meeting in Brussels from Wednesday.

 

"I cannot forecast where it will go, it is a decision for the president, but I can tell you that both on Capitol Hill and in State Department, there is a lot of concern about this situation and I'll return with the advice of our allies and engage in that discussion to determine the way ahead," he told reporters in Paris.

 

(Additional reporting by Idrees Ali in Paris; Editing by Robin Pomeroy and James Dalgleish)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-10-03

[connda]

"Humm" ????  The pot calls the kettle 'black.'

Ya'll can push the 'second hand' from 11:59:58 to 11:59:59 on the Doomsday clock.  Hopefully the 'Splatter-zone' won't extend this far South, but I'm not holding by breath.

Edited October 3, 2018 by connda

[Emster23]

"Counter measures (by the United States) would be to take out the missiles that are in development by Russia..." (underline mine) " Hutchison later clarified in a tweet that she was not talking about a preemptive strike...."

Am I missing something here? If taking them out during the development stage is not a "preemptive strike", then what is it?

Gonna send a pizza delivery man there, have him spill some Pepsi on the controls to ruin them or some other covert action?

[DoctorG]

I think her mouth got ahead of her brain.

[Pedrogaz]

I think a preemptive strike by the US would prompt a full scale nuclear attack by Russia on the US mainland and key NATO sites.

How come the US is allowed to renege on agreements like in putting the missile defence into Europe or scuppering the Iran deal at Israel's request, but no one else is allowed to renege on deals?

[impulse]

Given that millions of containers flow from country to country every year with sporadic inspections of the contents, does anyone really think a delivery system will be the difference between winning and losing WWIII?

 

I'm forecasting some old farts sitting in a room in their respective countries and using an App on their IPhone (or Huawei) to trigger strategically pre-placed nukes.

 

Not that there will be any winners...

 

[Andrew65]

3 hours ago, car720 said:

At the current rate of world population growth it has to happen sooner or later.

You're right there.

 

Something that's never mentioned when migration-crises occur, the over-population of the World starting to manifest itself.

[wombat]

the sabre rattling continues

[Tug]

Donald won’t do anything to anger his idol Putin

[Morch]

6 hours ago, connda said:

"Humm" ????  The pot calls the kettle 'black.'

Ya'll can push the 'second hand' from 11:59:58 to 11:59:59 on the Doomsday clock.  Hopefully the 'Splatter-zone' won't extend this far South, but I'm not holding by breath.

 

Are there any alleged US violations of the INF treaty?

[Guest]

8 hours ago, impulse said:

Given that millions of containers flow from country to country every year with sporadic inspections of the contents, does anyone really think a delivery system will be the difference between winning and losing WWIII?

 

I'm forecasting some old farts sitting in a room in their respective countries and using an App on their IPhone (or Huawei) to trigger strategically pre-placed nukes.

 

Not that there will be any winners...

Indeed. 

 

The reason we have not been annihilated by nuclear war, is simply that we don't want to do so. Also because we have been extremely lucky. There has been moments, close moments. 

 

Once the level of understanding of the aftermath what nuclear war actually brings, all odds are off. That's why it was so terrifying to hear Trump asking, three times "If we have nuclear weapons, why don't we use them?", prior he was elected. I suppose he had been forced to be educated on this matter.

 

Good and open international politics and co-operation between all the countries and people is the best assurance that even if there is misunderstandings, those don't so easily become a nuclear war. Trust between nations helps a lot. Ability to communicate helps a lot.

 

Nuclear war is over in 60 minutes. After that one hour, everything we know about the world, no longer exists. Not even here in Asia, where the destruction will come in weeks or months notice. 

 

It's worth to watch the final episode of Madam Secretary season 4 - Night Watch. It gives a bit of understanding how close to a annihilation we are. We have been this close for decades, we have had multiple very close calls and we still are. 

 

There really are no winners.

[Andrew65]

1 hour ago, car720 said:

and what is not getting mentioned much is just how rapidly India is approaching the same population as China.  They will overtake very soon.

When we see boats crossing the Mediterranean full of people, it's worth remembering that the population of Africa is projected to almost double by 2050, from 1.3 billion today, to 2.4 billion by then.