INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

miketheterrible wrote:While it sucks that US will now have the ability to strike deep within Russia through Poland, Lithania, Estonia, etc, it gives Russia the ability to strike western Europe from Kaliningrad and Northern Canada from Arctic. This just means though, KBP may get even more contracts to build even better PANTSIR systems to protect against BM's.

Trump wrote:Unless Russia comes to us and China comes to us and they all come to us and they say, ‘Let’s all of us get smart and let’s none of us develop those weapons,’ but if Russia’s doing it and if China’s doing it and we’re adhering to the agreement, that’s unacceptable.

googletranslate wrote:“A few days ago there was a glimpse of the message that Russia, after a long denial, had allegedly acknowledged the existence of a rocket, which we are accused of violating the treaty,” said a high-ranking diplomat.

"This is absolutely not true. We never denied that certain work in the field of improving our missile weapons is underway. But the problem is that the 9M729 missile has never been tested for a range prohibited by the agreement,"

To say nothing of countless new options for coastal anti-ship missiles. Think several Kinzhals mounted on simple Topol booster stage.

Mindstorm wrote:Rocket 15Ж57, of middle of '80 years, from Chukotka was capable to strike from there literally any single cm of US soil - from West to East side -, over the ocean was so crushingly behind under a strict technological point of view to be forced to place......subsonic cruise missiles.....on the other place of the balance to provide some type of makeshift cover for the begging to elimitate ,through diplomatic measures the immense menace represented by of our РСД-10.  

PapaDragon wrote:
The deed is done

Trump ‘confirms’ he’s pulling US out of nuclear deal with Russia

https://www.rt.com/usa/441841-trump-nuclear-deal-russia-pullout/

Time to start installing extra stage on Iskanders, Kinzhals and Zircons and mounting them on trucks

Chop, chop boys, there is 30 years worth of work to catch up on

PapaDragon wrote:Correct, this is exceptionally stupid way of going about it

Russia gains nothing from getting China to join and they now have option of saving huge amounts of cash by reintroducing intermediate range missiles instead of hassling with surface navy

A. Martyanov wrote:
Isn't the US in better position because they can deploy thousands of
nuclear armed missiles in Europe but Russia can not do the same in
Mexico? It means that Russia will have far less time to react to first
strike nuclear attack compared to the US. Just like in the Cold War.

No, it is not--one of the major reasons why US us exiting INF Treaty is a dawning realization that warfare changed, namely on March 1st. Of course, people who make decision of exiting INF Treaty are in it for some significant domestic purposes such as "revitalization" of Military Industrial Complex but this boat sailed long ago because, as I said, the gap is not just qualitative but generational. As per reaction time--modern early warning systems allow to see launches practically in real time.. So, as I said, most of the US behavior under Trump and last two (Obama, W) administrations are, increasingly, signs of American decline and last attempt to increase chaos in global system in an attempt to find ways for cure from implosion.

Same for China. I heard that the US is dropping the treaty due to issues with China too. The US can deploy such weapons near China but China can not deploy weapons in Mexico or Canada.

Again, what people miss often, despite China's gigantic economy (this one is very real, unlike American virtual one), China's nuclear (largely, deterrent forces) are nowhere near those of Russia. It is literally an issue of two different universes. Russia today can strike the US proper even conventionally with decapitating salvo(s)--this capability will continue to grow , once more Avangards. Petrels et all arrive. China doesn't have such capabilities and, in fact, it is China where the US will try to realistically push since US has an overwhelming advantage over China in the ocean, primarily due to US Navy's world class massive submarine force. China has realistically nothing to counterbalance it with. She is trying to catch up--it is not easy.

You, Russia, reduce weapons which you have in exchange for us, America, reducing weapons which we don't have.

GarryB wrote:Actually a two stage Iskander with a range of 2,000 to 3,000km would be useful in the Russian far east to destroy any US ABM system based in Alaska... and it could also be used against the Northern Pacific too with its new anti ship capacity...

I suspect the real motivation is not Chinese capability, but new Russian hypersonic technology that they want to get included in the ban... so screw them....  

About translating it's name, while it does refer to a bird which in English is called "Storm Petrel" that bird's name in Russian literally means "Storm Harbinger" which is pretty damn appropriate.

I am surprised to be honest what UK gov supported withdrawing USA form INF What a Face What a Face What a Face OK colonies and territories like Poland or Romania is understandable. Nobody cares for them . Own comprador elites neither.

But UK?! they will be among first to receive couple of Kinzahls/Avangads.

I am surprised to be honest what UK gov supported withdrawing USA form INF

If the US wants to include China then all of NATO needs to be included too... there is no point in tying Russian hands if France or the UK could develop IRBMs too...