US Presidential Candidate: Obama Shouldn't "Pass" Russian Anti-Ballistic Missile Defense Facilities in Poland

US Presidential Candidate: Obama Shouldn't "Pass" Russian Anti-Ballistic Missile Defense Facilities in Poland

WASHINGTON, September 15. The US presidential candidate from the Republican Party, Mitt Romney, said that Barack Obama was unable to obtain Russia's consent to serious sanctions against Iran after he "surrendered" Moscow to anti-missile defense facilities in Poland.


According to Gazeta.Ru, Romney believes that currently the main threat to global security is Iran, which has nuclear weapons. The presidential candidate is confident that Obama could put pressure on Iran, but ran into Russia.

"Moscow had one task - to remove the US missile defense facilities from Poland. And he handed over these facilities to the Russians," Romney told Fox News.

He stressed that if the US president reached an agreement with Russia in such a way that it supported serious sanctions against Tehran, the Americans would have an opportunity to put pressure on Iran in order to slow down the nuclear program.

Romney also added that he would not have “surrendered” to Moscow what “the Russians needed first and foremost” (objects of the missile defense system in Poland - approx. “Rosbalt”) until he received the consent of the Russian Federation on sanctions against Tehran.

Earlier, the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Fereydun Abbasi Davani, said that international sanctions would not stop the Iranian nuclear program.

"We consider the use of the atom for peaceful purposes as our legitimate right and firmly intend to defend it. Nuclear power contributes to the development of industry and science in Iran, and we are not going to give up its development," he said.

According to Davani, the international sanctions announced against Iran not only made the country stronger, but also brought it to the leading position in terms of economic development in the region.

Iran began developing nuclear technology in the middle of the 1980s. Western countries accuse Iran of developing a nuclear weapon under the cover of a peaceful atomic program. Tehran rejects all allegations and states that a nuclear program is needed to meet the country's electricity demands. International mediators on the Iranian nuclear issue, together with the IAEA, are trying to get Iran to suspend uranium enrichment activities.
Originator:
http://www.rosbalt.ru
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

15 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Banshee 15 September 2011 17: 12 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Well, now what?
    Okay, in Poland the missile defense system was "passed". There are now Romania and Turkey.
    So everyone drove.
    And a separate conversation with Iran. And missile defense objects can not get off. I hope so.
    1. Ivan35
      Ivan35 15 September 2011 18: 51 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      I am sure that "surrendering" Iran in exchange for the fact that somewhere until they put it about would be a mistake for Russia. Iran will be devoured - and then - when we are left face to face - they will deliver it again - only the new modernized ones will be devalued and will devalue our

      I hope that our leadership will not "lead" and will not surrender either Iran or Syria
      On the contrary, we must bargain for the opportunity to strengthen these friendly countries and try to rearm them
      1. Banshee 15 September 2011 22: 38 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        + definitely. There is nothing to add.
  2. Patriot
    Patriot 15 September 2011 17: 26 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Guys, it was a gambit. They gave up missile defense in Poland and delivered it in Romania and Turkey.

    By the way. FRIENDS,
    Well, how do you Pindos? Well done !!! At the beginning of this, SNV-3 was ratified with a dimple iPod. And just the other day we signed an agreement on the installation of missile defense systems in Romania and Turkey. So keep the liberals Dima and Vova. Keep it up. I think that if we fulfill all the conditions under START-3, then the Americans will no longer need START-4,5 ,,, and so they squeezed us into a hard bag. And, our -removed- even the Mace cannot be lifted into the air. GUYS. WE ARE IN A DEEP ASS!
    1. PSih2097 15 September 2011 18: 37 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Well, he surrendered anti-missile missiles in Poland, instead of this they will adjust the radars to Norway and Japan, and instead of the ground component there will be a sea one, so they changed the awl for soap ...
  3. almost demobil 15 September 2011 18: 19 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    I believe that strategic offensive arms can be poached according to the example of the Ukrainians. After the 2012 elections (suddenly the medveputs will disappear), pohera and offer a new one.
    1. Varnaga 15 September 2011 19: 21 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      And what will it give, demobilization? I'm purely for fun.
  4. Varnaga 15 September 2011 19: 20 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Well, one more proof that the ABM is just a subject of political bargaining. On this side, Moscow is playing a very profitable game, knowing that the missile defense cannot be dangerous for the Strategic Missile Forces, and it also raises amers to the maximum. Bravo.
    1. Marat
      Marat 15 September 2011 21: 11 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Yes Varnaga - somewhere I heard or read such an opinion. If so, then our bravo. In my opinion, I read with Starikov - for each round of negotiations, pendosy and Russian diplomats prepare a set of "trump cards - who will give or strangle for what and what - they often have patched cards - like you have little democracy or the situation with" human rights "begin to use as a pressure tool
      In this situation, of course you can understand the leadership of Russia - it’s stupid to abandon the "card that goes into the hands" -

      But it turns out even in this case, we must "play along" with our diplomats and shout about the "threat about"

      Missile defense does not threaten our sysas right now - right now, but in a parspective view, Russia's surroundings with bases and the deployment of new missiles on ships is a threat - so you have to "scold" anyone
      1. Banshee 15 September 2011 22: 41 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Well, if so. It is possible that there is similarity with the SDI system, to which the USSR was once led. left sideways. If the states fly into the pipe with their missile defense system (and it would be nice if our craftsmen build something that will be missile defense), then this will definitely benefit us.

        Another question, is this true? Painfully, they crawl about all the holes ... I didn’t hold and I’ll not keep Pindos for fools. Alas, they just don’t do anything.
        1. old rocket man 12 February 2012 15: 55 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          US missile defense in Europe is needed not so much against our strategic nuclear forces as to keep Eurorol close to us and prevent the collapse of NATO, we will have this missile defense system for a long time to come, but we must scream against it and as loudly as possible
    2. plotnikov561956 8 January 2012 16: 58 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      ABM and START-3 are just tactical moves. Try to make out the strategy. What happened after EBNushki and what we have now. It’s not yet time to knock your fist. Today we retreated but we will take it later. Putin is a chance for Russia and
      his strategy is designed for at least 12 years. There will also be Stalin for the fifth column and Ivan the Terrible for the discontented volosts of Russia. In the place of the USA, he would have to be praised in order to drop the rating a bit among the people, well done in one word in this plan. simple this litmus test clearly sees. Who doubts - analyze. Synthesize
      With all the anti-sympathies to the Kremlin, I give credit to the GDP - this is a strategist.
  5. figwam 15 September 2011 20: 32 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Was it they who gave us the missile defense? The concession would be to completely abandon the missile defense system near our borders. Why are the US holding its bases and nuclear weapons in Europe? Also against Iran and North Korea. When will the amendment of the rotten James Venik be canceled?
    The USA were enemies for us, they will be enemies.
  6. APASUS 15 September 2011 21: 18 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Nothing changes in US foreign policy. The country can be conquered, and if it cannot be conquered, it can be deceived !!!!
  7. Rashid 15 September 2011 21: 46 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    “Iran possessing nuclear weapons” sounds like a statement. For the layman, this becomes a fact, that’s the reason for the attack. The same technique as with Iraq.
  8. wasjasibirjac 9 December 2011 07: 50 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    2013 During a tour of the museum in Tehran, a group of American tourists discovered a nuclear gun manufactured by the Tula Imperial Arms Factory, 1790. release. US State Department accuses Russia of exporting nuclear technology