Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Wed Oct 17 23:31:57 2018

Utopia Talk / Politics / “They are on notice.”
swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Tue Oct 02 09:20:29
World News

October 2, 2018 / 8:21 AM / Updated 2 hours ago

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

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 diplomat solution but was prepared to consider a military strike if Russian 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,” she 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.”

The Russian foreign ministry was not immediately available for comment. In the past, it 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.

The comments by Hutchison, who was appointed to the NATO post by U.S. President Donald Trump, are the most direct warning of a preemptive strike since a U.S. official said in 2017 the United States would consider its own system if Russia continued to violate the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty.

The treaty bans medium-range missiles capable of hitting Europe or Alaska. The United States and Russia celebrated its 30th anniversary in Geneva in 2017.

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 (310-3,417 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 Russian 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.

http://www...ssary-nato-envoy-idUSKCN1MC1J6
Seb
Member
Tue Oct 02 09:22:51
That's not a reasonable interpretation of what was said.

It sounds more like they would develop counterforce capability that would be used in the event of conflict.

This headline makes it sound like the us is threatening to preemptively destroy weapons as soon as Russia rolls them out.
Paramount
Member
Tue Oct 02 11:27:07
”The United States believes ... ”

Okay.


”in breach of a Cold War treaty”

Well, maybe that treaty is VERY UNFAIR to Russia.
Paramount
Member
Tue Oct 02 11:34:42
”We are laying down the markers so that our allies will help us”

What allies? Saudi Barbaria?
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Oct 02 11:35:35
i agree w/ Seb, that headline is nonsense
Paramount
Member
Tue Oct 02 11:41:57
If the headline is wrong then these phrases must also be wrong:

”the United States will seek to destroy it before it becomes operational, Washington’s envoy to NATO said on Tuesday.”

”U.S. ambassador to NATO Kay Bailey Hutchison said Washington remained committed to a diplomat solution but was prepared to consider a military strike if Russian development of the medium-range system continued. ”
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Oct 02 11:54:41
i think they ARE wrong... those aren't quotes, the quotes are given after, i think misinterpreting the quotes
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Oct 02 11:56:51
this is the kind of thing you see in Fox News articles... they give a skew in headline & initial paragraphs then give the actual facts down later in the article where people go into it conditioned w/ the bias from the earlier parts

not sure if this person deliberately misleading or just not very smart :p
Paramount
Member
Tue Oct 02 11:58:41
The first phrase isn’t a quote, but it says that Washington’s envoy to NATO said those words.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Oct 02 12:06:12
if there's no quotes it's not a quote

frequently reporters try to summarize/simplify what a person said, but here they seem to have gotten it wrong

although this story is in a number of places, so not sure who the original person was to plant the wrong idea
Paramount
Member
Tue Oct 02 12:06:42
”the United States will seek to destroy it before it becomes operational, Washington’s envoy to NATO said on Tuesday.”

Maybe the author of the article misinterpreted what she was really saying:


”“At that point, we would be looking at the capability to take out a (Russian) missile that could hit any of our countries,” she 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.”


Either the author misinterpreted her, or he wrote like he did to deliberately mislead the readers, and then writing the headline as a click bait. If so, he should get fired and be sent to a slave labor camp in Asia.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Oct 02 12:12:10
here's actual transcript:

------------

Question: [Inaudible] in Norway. Ma’am, can you be more specific what kind of new information that you are bringing to the table regarding the breach of the INF Treaty? And more explicitly also, what kind of countermeasures that you are considering.

Ambassador Hutchison: The countermeasures would be to take out the missiles that are in development by Russia in violation of the treaty. So that would be the countermeasure eventually. We are trying not to do anything that would violate the treaty on our side, which allows research, but not going forward into development, and we are carefully keeping the INF Treaty requirements on our side, while Russia is violating.

We have documented on numerous occasions that Russia is violating. We have shown Russia that evidence. Some of our allies have seen that evidence. All of our allies have seen some of that evidence.

I think it is very important that we have the capability to deter, not only for European defense but for American defense. We have an intermediate range risk from Russia as well. So I think it is important that we continue to do everything as an alliance to put pressure on Russia to come forward, and first of all admit that they are in violation, and then secondly, to stop the violations. Because they are clearly doing it, our allies know that, our allies have spoken at the Summit with a clear indication that Russia must stop these violations.


Question: Thanks, Ambassador. Lorne [Inaudible], Associated Press. Just to clarify a little bit when you said to take out the missiles that are in development, we are a little excited here. Do you mean to get those withdrawn? You don’t mean to actually take them out in a more [inaudible]?

Ambassador Hutchison: Well, withdrawing, yes. Getting them to withdraw would be our choice, of course. But I think the question was what would you do if this continues to a point where we know that they are capable of delivering. And at that point we would then be looking at a capability to take out a missile that could his any of our countries in Europe and hit America in Alaska. So it is in all of our interests, and Canada as well, I suppose. So we have our North Atlantic risk as well as the European risk.

We are not moving in that direction right now, but we are trying to tell Russia, and you know, the United States Congress told Russia last year when they passed the Armed Services Bill about this time last year, that we know they have violated the treaty and we are beginning the research capabilities that are allowed by the treaty to deter a medium-range ballistic missile.

So I think they are on notice. I think Congress has spoken. And I think it is time now for Russia to come to the table and stop the violations that we know they are making.

--------------

sounds to me just like 'if they develop X, we'll develop a counter-X system'


http://nat...bassador-kay-bailey-hutchison/
Paramount
Member
Tue Oct 02 12:14:04
Actually, now that I read this again she is actually saying:

”Counter measures (by the United States) would be to take out the missiles that are in development by Russia”

This can only mean that they would seek to destroy the missiles while they are in development, meaning a pre-emptive attack on Russia.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Oct 02 12:21:20
yeah, i think she planted a wrong seed in their minds (as second question in transcript notes people being 'excited' by the comment)

i think she's saying "Counter measures would be [systems designed] to take out the missiles that are in development by Russia [when operational]."

added the []'s parts
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Tue Oct 02 15:41:21

Well, if we live through it the aftermath should be interesting.

show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share