From: Robert Comer 

>Why? Israel has knocked out Russian crewed radar & intel stations in
>Syria before.

That's Israel and they have a big friend.  Iran's big friend is Russia, so ...

>I think Putin's idea would be that the next radar is the BMEWS line e.g.
>Fylingdales.

?

>It's in the caucasus/kavkaz. A region given it's name by the caucasus
>mountains wot are mountainous.

That's what I thought, mountainous is the easiest terrain to defend.

>They had a radar base in Cuba too. If the PRC put a Radar station in
>northern Mexico you'd be concerned. If they put in a radar station with
>a layered defense then I think that concern might rise to apoplectic.

It wouldn't make strategic sense to put one there, it certainly couldn't
stop us from attacking china with ICBM's, but yeah, we'd worry a bit
because we wouldn't know what else they might be doing. We'd target the
place with bigger than just cruise missile probably, but I expect any
military power to target things like that if they are close.

>Hum. So were you to have a similar base in oh let's see....Guam
>or....Japan & also a few ships with modified SAM & Aegis then would the
>PRC & India get concerned?

I think Japan already has them, don't know about Guam.

>Not entirely true. They are working on their mil esp their navy (e.g.
>introducing SSN & a new aircraft carrier) & their strategic rocket
>forces....I mean space program.

Still way behind...

>Well my feeling is that the nuclear arms treaties are dead anyway (all
>of them inc the NPT) & that we should simply gird ourselves for the fall
>out.

Assured destruction is a pretty big deterrent for the small guys and MAD is
a pretty big deterrent for us big guys...

--
Bob Comer



On Fri, 08 Jun 2007 16:21:05 +0100, Ad
 wrote:

>Robert Comer wrote:
>>> Unless the vulcans are targeted first.
>>
>> Not easy to do at all.  Coverage would be my only concern, but if you
>> have enough of them tied to an aegis type radar...
>>
>
>You'd be surprised.
>
>e.g 3 waves where wave 1 & 2 get as far as they can while spewing lots
>of chaff/silver foil. wave 3 carries high explosive esp percussion
>detonation.
>
>
>>> (A) This is (I think) a proposal relating to the radar as the
>>> interceptors need a "bit of room to get started".
>>
>> True about the part that the missiles themselves needing to be further
>> back, but I haven't seen anything discussing that.
>>
>>> (B) This radar station would be within easy reach of either
Iran or Russia.
>>
>> Seeing as how Russia is going to be there using it too, they're not a
>> concern, as for Iran, I don't think they have the tech yet to be a
>> threat to it, and they would think twice about it anyway if Russia's
>> involved.
>>
>
>Why? Israel has knocked out Russian crewed radar & intel stations in
>Syria before.
>
>>> Nope I mean there was a reason why they threatened low level terrain
>>> following cruise missiles.
>>
>> I knew what you meant, but I don't share your concern about it. That's
>> one reason you have the missiles further back, if the primary radar
>> get's hit, you know you have incoming and you can deal with it.
>>
>
>I think Putin's idea would be that the next radar is the BMEWS line e.g.
>Fylingdales.
>
>
>>> consider the geography of Azerbaijan.
>>
>> I really don't know much about that.
>>
>
>It's in the caucasus/kavkaz. A region given it's name by the caucasus
>mountains wot are mountainous.
>
>>> Ummmm.......In the same way Russia has a base in Cuba but it might be
>>> tricky putting too much mil kit there much as Khrushchev &
Kennedy found.
>>
>> Russia's already got a major radar station there....  (This will
>> replace that)
>>
>
>They had a radar base in Cuba too. If the PRC put a Radar station in
>northern Mexico you'd be concerned. If they put in a radar station with
>a layered defense then I think that concern might rise to apoplectic.
>
>
>>> Oh indeed. Or wrt the PRC, Russia & India etc it causes a major new
>>> nuclear arms race as it means the only way a nuclear power can be sure
>>> of beating it is to swamp it.
>>
>> The only missiles this installation will cover from china or India is
>> anything targeting the middle east, Russia, or Europe, so I don't see
>> the incentive for a nuclear arms race, but anyway, China is already on
>> that road.
>
>Hum. So were you to have a similar base in oh let's see....Guam
>or....Japan & also a few ships with modified SAM & Aegis then would the
>PRC & India get concerned?
>
>> I don't think India can do that kind of thing right now
>> and they seem to want to expand their power economically, not
>> militarily, anyway.
>>
>
>Not entirely true. They are working on their mil esp their navy (e.g.
>introducing SSN & a new aircraft carrier) & their strategic rocket
>forces....I mean space program.
>
>
>>> How soon before the PRC & India start moving from 20 to
2000 warheads?
>>
>> India, maybe never, China, they've already started.
>>
>
>If this goes ahead then ........both will start in earnest.
>
>
>>> Did the SALT treaties (along with possibly the S/IRBM treaties) die when
>>> the US pulled out of the ABM treaty?
>>
>> SALT was never effective to begin with.
>>
>
>Well my feeling is that the nuclear arms treaties are dead anyway (all
>of them inc the NPT) & that we should simply gird ourselves for the fall
>out.
>
>
>Adam

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5