Military Review

Media: Trump's rocket plans will violate the terms of the INF Treaty

39
US President Donald Trump, having signed the national defense bill in December, approved the development of a missile that violates the terms of the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Short-Range Missiles, Time magazine writes.


Media: Trump's rocket plans will violate the terms of the INF Treaty


The project budget for a land-based mobile cruise missile is 25 million dollars. New development, as noted in the article, should be a direct response to the "deployment" of Russia's own missiles, "contrary to" the treaty.

Nuclear expert arms Steven Schwartz is confident that the development violates the terms of the INF Treaty.

The bill requires the Minister of Defense to spend millions of dollars on the development of a non-nuclear mobile rocket, which would be contrary to the terms of the contract if it is tested, manufactured or deployed.
He remarked.

According to the director for disarmament and reducing the level of threats of the Association for Arms Control Kingston Rafe, the new American rocket increases the likelihood that Russia will respond with an official denunciation of the treaty, reports RIA News


Photos used:
http://www.globallookpress.com/
39 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. solzh
    solzh 4 January 2018 11: 11
    10
    Russia will respond by official denunciation of the treaty

    Yeah, wait a minute, right here by denunciation and we’ll answer. Other than expressing extreme concern, there will be nothing else.
    1. Alexander 3
      Alexander 3 4 January 2018 11: 13
      +3
      Very concerned. There they have a virus of concern.
      1. Masya masya
        Masya masya 4 January 2018 11: 15
        +8
        Quote: Alexander 3
        Very concerned. There they have a virus of concern.

        The most, the most, the most !!! laughing
    2. Tusk
      Tusk 4 January 2018 11: 15
      +2
      Quote: solzh
      Other than expressing extreme concern, there will be nothing else.

      Yes, we already have everything and missile defense including .. But we will express concern !!!
      The Cold War is in full swing. HERE RACE ARMS, will not be! (experience already)
      1. 210ox
        210ox 4 January 2018 11: 40
        +5
        It’s not about experience, but about the capabilities of domestic industry. What, we wouldn’t build destroyers? We would build. It’s only impossible at the moment
        Quote: Tusk
        Quote: solzh
        Other than expressing extreme concern, there will be nothing else.

        Yes, we already have everything and missile defense including .. But we will express concern !!!
        The Cold War is in full swing. HERE RACE ARMS, will not be! (experience already)
    3. dorz
      dorz 4 January 2018 11: 15
      0
      Well, no way medium-range missiles can not threaten the United States.
      1. Alexander 3
        Alexander 3 4 January 2018 11: 24
        +3
        Well, if only from Cuba
      2. svp67
        svp67 5 January 2018 01: 22
        0
        Quote: dorz
        Well, no way medium-range missiles can not threaten the United States.

        They can. From our Chukotka and from the territory of Cuba and Mexico
    4. svp67
      svp67 4 January 2018 12: 12
      +2
      Quote: solzh
      Yeah, wait a minute, right here by denunciation and we’ll answer. Other than expressing extreme concern, there will be nothing else.

      It would be nice if they would think so .... And the answer will be quickly ready, since the INF Treaty did not prohibit the development of sea-based missiles, and we have a suitable tractor ...
      1. alexmach
        alexmach 4 January 2018 13: 50
        +3
        I agree, no denunciation is necessary, it is necessary first of all to be technically prepared.
    5. Piramidon
      Piramidon 4 January 2018 13: 17
      +1
      Quote: solzh
      Russia will respond by official denunciation of the treaty

      Yeah, wait a minute, right here by denunciation and we’ll answer. Other than expressing extreme concern, there will be nothing else.

      Mr. All-Propeller, are you sure that Russia does not have an “ace up its sleeve” in the form of development of INF systems? Even to take technologies of the times of the USSR, they too were not thrown into the trash.
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 4 January 2018 15: 33
        0
        BRRS - an expensive pleasure, there will be enough cruise supersonic missiles. The winged ode is worth 50 million, and one BRDS is more than a billion.
        1. svp67
          svp67 5 January 2018 01: 26
          0
          Quote: Vadim237
          The winged ode is worth 50 million, and one BRDS is more than a billion.

          And who said that when withdrawing from this treaty, the Kyrgyz Republic will not be adopted exactly? Moreover, in the variant of sea-based, we already have them ...
  2. Masya masya
    Masya masya 4 January 2018 11: 12
    +7
    Well, and who has the stigma in the gun, but the mug is crooked? recourse before blaming others for yourself, godfather, turning around ... wassat
  3. Bear in the north
    Bear in the north 4 January 2018 11: 15
    +3
    They drag us into the arms race, blocking financial flows with sanctions. Believe, choke. However, there is already some experience, I hope we do not get involved ....
  4. Romanych.by
    Romanych.by 4 January 2018 11: 17
    +1
    They haven’t yet come up with a treaty so that the United States doesn’t violate it. They wanted to spit on everyone, and we, in other matters, as always, are only concerned. And this is sad ...
  5. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 4 January 2018 11: 20
    +3
    A modified caliber mounted on the Iskander chassis already exists and has been tested.
    The contract was partially violated (tests were). But not completely disrupted (production not established).

    If the Americans begin to test their future development, they will partially violate the contract.
    1. Glory1974
      Glory1974 4 January 2018 11: 42
      +4
      A modified caliber mounted on the Iskander chassis already exists and has been tested.
      The contract was partially violated (tests were). But not completely disrupted (production not established).

      The Americans have universal launchers installed for missile defense. Can be used to launch Tomahawks. There are tests, and mass production, and the possibility of mass application. From this point of view, the United States has long violated it.
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 4 January 2018 12: 00
        +3
        "There are tests" ////

        In fact, you are right.
        But "legally" there is a formality: from the GROUND universal
        launch containers Tomahawks NEVER started. Only from the sea.
        So - formally - they did not violate the contract. Although in fact there is little difference, of course.
        In short, you need to sit down at the negotiating table and specify the types of weapons, types of launch and wording.
        1. Chichikov
          Chichikov 4 January 2018 12: 54
          +2
          Quote: voyaka uh
          But “legally” there is a formality: Tomahawks NEVER were allowed out of the GROUND universal launching containers. Only from the sea. So - formally - they did not violate the contract.
          Legal flood! It's funny, but something in style - killing on land with a "sea" knife does not violate the law, and vice versa.
          1. Going
            Going 4 January 2018 13: 04
            +3
            But "legally" there is a formality: from the GROUND universal
            launch containers Tomahawks NEVER started. Only from the sea.


            So they delivered, in Romania and Poland, offshore installations ...
          2. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 4 January 2018 14: 52
            +4
            "Legal flood!" ////

            That's right. For example: launch Caliber from the Caspian Sea
            from a missile boat (or any barge) - everything is strictly by agreement.
            And pull the same installation to the nearest beach and bedrooms - a gross violation of the contract.
            That's why I say: you have to sit again at the negotiating table and redo the contract
            about medium-range missiles.
        2. alexmach
          alexmach 4 January 2018 13: 52
          +1
          So Callibre with a ground launcher formally did not violate anything. There, the rocket is a sight rocket, with a short range, not subject to restrictions.
        3. NKT
          NKT 4 January 2018 14: 09
          +1
          Is our KR for Iskander legally flying further than 500 km? wink
      2. sd68
        sd68 4 January 2018 22: 27
        0
        Can not. There is no suitable equipment for starting.
        The MK-41 launcher alone is not enough to launch, for each type of missile there must be an appropriate launch subsystem, on land it is not
    2. Tusv
      Tusv 4 January 2018 12: 27
      +1
      Quote: voyaka uh
      A modified caliber mounted on the Iskander chassis already exists and has been tested.

      Not well, when We say that you still experience something. This is clear. Powerful early missile warning system. And from where do you know what we are experiencing? Magpie on the tail reported or guess it yourself? bully
      1. APASUS
        APASUS 4 January 2018 12: 48
        +2
        Quote: Tusv
        Magpie on the tail reported or guess it yourself?

        Americans usually rely on such messages:
        Tests of two missile systems carried out on May 29 at once - ICBM RS-24 and KR R-500 - are still a mystery to military specialists. If the RS-24 is, apparently, a modernized version of the “Topolya-M” with an RCG from the Bulava SLBM, the R-500 can be a ground-based version of the 3M54 Caliber-NK naval anti-ship cruise missile (export designation “Club-M” "- Club-M).

        It may or may not be, but as evidence will come down, so the Russians are guilty of anyway!
        1. Tusv
          Tusv 4 January 2018 12: 55
          +1
          Quote: APASUS
          but as evidence will come down, so the Russians are guilty of anyway!

          Not well. We always experience something. Is it true hi
    3. Vadim237
      Vadim237 4 January 2018 13: 03
      +1
      There is an option with six Club T launchers, for 3M 14 missiles, and a modification with a range of 2600 will also go there.
  6. KVU-NSVD
    KVU-NSVD 4 January 2018 11: 43
    +6
    For 25 million there, perhaps only preliminary R&D can begin. Or maybe they’ll just monitor our reaction. For their military-industrial complex, this is not the sum. Although, in general, it’s not difficult for them to create a mobile complex for Axes (for us for Caliber). Or remove one step from the intercontinental missile, turning it into an RSD and installing it on a mobile chassis - also not Newton’s bin. Moreover, on both sides, all these technologies have not gone anywhere.
  7. Herculesic
    Herculesic 4 January 2018 12: 07
    +2
    One hundred times spears were broken on this subject! We need to formally withdraw from this agreement! It limits us in creating new short- and medium-range missiles! !!
    1. alexmach
      alexmach 4 January 2018 13: 54
      +1
      No, not necessary. Well, it’s not particularly limiting.
  8. Nemesis
    Nemesis 4 January 2018 12: 12
    +1
    The US has long violated the INF Treaty
  9. Ryzzard ewiak
    Ryzzard ewiak 4 January 2018 14: 00
    +1
    While we can sleep peacefully, but not always so. The book of Revelation warns: “And another horse came out, fiery red, and the rider sitting on it was allowed to take peace from the earth so that people would kill each other. And he was given a great sword ”(6: 4).

    Jesus, speaking of this war, warned: “The [εγερθησεται] people [εθνος] will rise against the [επι] people [εθνος], and the [και] kingdom [βασιλεια] against the [επι] kingdom [βασιλειαν], the tremors [σει] τε] significant [μεγαλοι] and [και] along and across [κατα] regions [τοπους] smooth [λιμοι] and [και] epidemics [λοιμοι] will be [εσονται]. The terrifying things [φοβητρα] also [τε] and [και] unusual phenomena [σημεια] from [απ] the sky [ουρανου] mighty [μεγαλα] will [εσται] ”(Luke 21:10, 11). Some ancient manuscripts contain the words of Jesus “and frosts” [και χειμωνες], and in Mark 13: 8 “and riots” [και ταραχαι].

    “The Great Sword”, “powerful terrifying and unusual phenomena from the sky”, “significant tremors, smoothness and epidemics across entire regions”, “riots, (chaos)”. A major consequence of this “sword” will also be climate change and hunger (Revelation 6: 5, 6). What does all this mean? Yes, we have here a complete picture of the consequences of a global nuclear war. Jesus warns us against all the threats posed by this war.

    All this is connected only with this war. Jesus pointed out that: “All this is precisely the beginning of labor pains” (Matthew 24: 7, 8).

    Who will be the first to use this weapon? When will this happen? I recall a fragment of an ancient vision: “And [the king of the north] will return to his land with great movable property [1945. This detail indicated that Hitler would also attack the Soviet Union and fight until the very bitter end. In the beginning there were no signs of such an end to the war], and his heart was against the covenant of the saint [there was then state atheism in the USSR, and the believers were repressed], and will act [this means activity on the international arena], and will return to his land [1991- 1993. The collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact, the Russian troops returned to their land]. At the appointed time, he will return back [this also means the collapse of the EU and NATO]. And it will go south, but it will not be as earlier [2008 - Georgia] or later [Ukraine], because the inhabitants of the Kittim coast [the Americans] will come against it, and it will be dejected and return ”(Daniel 11: 28-30a).

    The third time there will be a military confrontation with the United States (regardless of who then will be the president of the United States). “The people will rise against the people” (similar to 2008), and then “kingdom to kingdom”. The hot spot may be Georgia.

    In 1882, Great Britain conquered Egypt and assuming the role of “southern king”. More or less at the same time, Russia took the position of “king of the north”, expanding its influence in the territories that once belonged to Seleucus I (Daniel 11:27). All predictions from this vision come true (from the time of Ancient Persia) with 100% accuracy, in chronological order.
  10. Piramidon
    Piramidon 4 January 2018 14: 54
    +1
    In fact, this whole agreement on the INF Treaty is now complete bullshit. Is it really so difficult to place the same Caliber naval launchers on land? Or am I not catching up with something? Who is in the know, please explain.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 4 January 2018 15: 35
      0
      Not officially, both we and the USA have already withdrawn from the INF Treaty.
  11. Zomanus
    Zomanus 4 January 2018 15: 15
    0
    For some reason I’m sure that we are also making such a rocket,
    just do not burn. like trump.
    And when America gets their rocket,
    we will have an answer to her appearance.
  12. Vladimir K.
    Vladimir K. 4 January 2018 19: 57
    +1
    Now it’s clear (although everything was clear even before that), what the hell with the accusations of Russia of violating this treaty was there — they wanted to create an information background so that without losing their face they themselves would withdraw from this treaty - well, like the Russians are the first and let there be no evidence, we don’t need them - just believe, the treacherous Russians were the first to break the contract.
  13. Krasnyiy komissar
    Krasnyiy komissar 5 January 2018 01: 33
    +1
    Only a complete deer does not understand that a hot war between Russia and 3.14ndostan and his vassals is inevitable like sunrise, and all attempts to avoid it only bring the inevitable closer. 3.14ndos are VERY afraid of human and material losses at home, so our response to START-3 and the NPT should be Russia's response to the US withdrawal from the INF. When we had 46000 charges, the mattresses were laid with bricks around the clock, knowing about the terrible consequences of the war with the USSR. Our task is not to try to catch up with NATO in conventional weapons, to make an attack on Russia a pure suicide for any country or coalition of countries. It may be better if we have a thousand tanks and a hundred thousand soldiers, but several thousand modern ICBMs and infantry ballistic regiments, carrying a sea of ​​light and heat into the enemy’s house, will look at the enemy.