Options
Russia threatens Denmark
bluesdiamond
Posts: 11,362 Forum Member
✭✭
Russia has threatened to strike Danish ships with Nuclear weapons?
And some think Britain is making it up about Russia!
And some think Britain is making it up about Russia!
0
Comments
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/denmark/11487509/Russia-warns-Denmark-its-warships-could-become-nuclear-targets.html
http://www.thelocal.dk/20150321/russia-threatens-denmark-with-nuclear-attack
http://www.3news.co.nz/world/russia-threatens-denmark-with-missile-threat-2015032207
'Russia has gone on the offensive in the Baltic, warning Denmark that if it joins Nato’s missile defence shield, its navy will be a legitimate target for a Russian nuclear attack.
“I don’t think that Danes fully understand the consequence if Denmark joins the American-led missile defence shield. If they do, then Danish warships will be targets for Russian nuclear missiles,” said Mikhail Vanin, the Russian ambassador to Denmark, to the Jyllands-Posten newspaper.'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/denmark/11487509/Russia-warns-Denmark-its-warships-could-become-nuclear-targets.html
Edit: I see Sangreal beat me to it.
Thats not the problem. The problem is that Putin keeps on issuing nuclear threats on trivial, or invented, issues. In this case, NATO defensive missiles pose no threat to Russia's strategic forces - the laws of physics don't allow any Danish ship to threaten Russian missiles based 1000-4000 miles away. If it did there would be zero need to use a nuclear weapon against a small frigate. Putin either thinks that going nuclear is a real option for him - and Russian military doctrine has increased its importance and talks about earlier escalation to nuclear weapons - or, worse, he thinks that the nuclear balance is now so much in Russia's favour, that NATO will do what he says out of fear, he can keep on applying pressure, and he may even be able to actually use his nuclear weapons and get away with it. .
As the Russian nuclear strategists seem to think they now have nuclear superiority in Europe, and the Pentagon ones agree with them, and are looking at their options , there's a very real risk here that Putin is going to make one threat, or launch one invasion, too many .
Thats not the problem. The problem is that Putin keeps on issuing nuclear threats on trivial, or invented, issues. In this case, NATO defensive missiles pose no threat to Russia's strategic forces - the laws of physics don't allow any Danish ship to threaten Russian missiles based 1000-4000 miles away. If it did there would be zero need to use a nuclear weapon against a small frigate. Putin either thinks that going nuclear is a real option for him - and Russian military doctrine has increased its importance and talks about earlier escalation to nuclear weapons - or, worse, he thinks that the nuclear balance is now so much in Russia's favour, that NATO will do what he says out of fear, he can keep on applying pressure, and he may even be able to actually use his nuclear weapons and get away with it. .
As the Russian nuclear strategists seem to think they now have nuclear superiority in Europe, and the Pentagon ones agree with them, and are looking at their options , there's a very real risk here that Putin is going to make one threat, or launch one invasion, too many .
Yeah, scary stuff :-(
Denmark is strategically very important.
There's a direct route from St Petersburg to Denmark via the Baltic sea
and Denmark is then the only major obstacle inbetween the Baltic and North seas.
If taking that route, then Russia has to go through or over it to get to us.
If NATO are setting up more bases at strategic points around Russia you have to understand that they may see this as a potential threat to their security. Especially in this current climate.
They may rightly believe that they themselves are being targeted by these bases and thus will target these bases.
This isn't the same as some may fear from some scaremongering in some news media that Russia are actually threatening to attack Denmark. It's a case of both sides targeting each other, just in case.
As I understand it this will be standard practice. Russia will be seen as a potential target. NATO bases will be seen as a potential target.
The problem is it getting more like the Cold War where each side gets stuck in a stalemate and keep ramping up their defences because of a perceived threat from each other.
Err... it doesn't have it's own nuclear deterrent.
But the Danish Navy is respectable for a country of its size as it has a lot of coastline as covers a strategic area at the entrance to the Baltic
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_Royal_Danish_Navy_ships
It doesn't. Putin is just warning them that if they join a gang they should not be surprised if they get hurt/killed when the gang have a fight.
It's a very complex situation indeed. First, we have Russia who is afraid of NATO expanding further into Ukraine and no way they would accept any diplomatic solution involving Ukraine become part of NATO, and on the other hand, we have USA and it's satellites, the EU, who won't let Ukraine go back under the Russian influence after everything that happened there.
Sanctions no matter how severe wont make Russians to protest against the Putin regime and eventually topple it, because Russia isn't Libya or Egypt. Soviet mentality is such that people are being taught from the early age to endure pretty much everything. After all, we see that in the wake of the sanctions Putin is more popular among russians than ever before. They see him as a patriot who is resisting the imperialistic influence from the West. So, sanctions used against Russia as a weapon is not a solution as it would only make it worse for the West if Russia becomes militarily unpredictable in the future, and not to mention the damage to the economy of both countries.
Any nuclear strike on NATO and Moscow and most likely half the world would be wiped out in an instant
Don't be foolish. It's not like Denmark blocks off the Baltic from the North Sea. Oh,..
There would be few counties which wouldn't be subject to a missile or two and Denmark isn't one of them.
No, but NATO is spreading ever eastwards.
How would the US feel if Mexico and other Central American countries for instance joined a Russian-led nuclear "shield", with all that that entailed?
It never ceases to amaze me how the American-dominated NATO with its member country lackeys seem to think they have a God-given right to move right up to Russia with their nuclear capability while if it happened the other way round then they bring the world to the verge of nuclear Armageddon, as we know from 1962.
Of course NATO membership offers a nation like Ukraine an ally in regards to say anti pracy patrols, like the West, many countries in the East rely on the seas for commerce.
The former Soviet bloc, is full of McDonalds, KFC, religious choice, freedom of travel.
For some old Russian Communists these ideas are scary.
Quite. It makes the upcoming 2015 SDSR particularly interesting and important, especially with regard to the maritime defence of the UK.
That's the bit networkbabe (and others) are missing.
So back in the good'ol MAD days, one side launches, everyone else launches and much of the world has a very bad day. Sooo..
In this case, NATO defensive missiles pose no threat to Russia's strategic forces
Is untrue. The 'defensive' missiles may render Russia's strategic forces unable to strike back. That's the point of the 'shield'. It may prevent a Russian first strike, but it also prevents a Russian counterstrike. That's been the problem ever since 'Star Wars' was first floated, ie it lets the side with the best defence attack with relative impunity.
I wonder how many MoD types have been dusting off old REFORGER docs and assessing those in a modern context.. Especially as there's a bit of a REFORGER-lite underway at the moment, and Germany has somewhat fewer Leopards lurking in the grass than it did in those days.
.......OH... erm..... wait.
It's called freedom of choice. Perhaps a lot of country's in the former eastern bloc didn't appreciate being under the bootbof Russia be would rather not be ever again.
Is that their god given right?
1. How far is Denmark from Russia?
2. How many nuclear BMs are being Installed Denmark?
Oh, errrm wait.
There are also other fun strategic possibilities. Suppose the EU/NATO decide in the interests of 'security' to set up a Baltic version of this-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreux_Convention_Regarding_the_Regime_of_the_Straits
to restrict Russian access in/out of the Baltic? We've had all those stories about Russians 'threatening' Baltic states after all.
(and Montreux is causing some fun in the Ukraine at the moment. Ukraine had ideas of building an LNG terminal. Turkey's naturally said 'Hell NO!' to the idea of LNG carriers transiting through downtown Istanbul)