HayaBusa schrieb am 21. Juni 2009 11:45
> Kennt jemand die Reichweite der AbwehrRaketen? Soweit ich die
> WerbeGrafiken richtig deute soll dieses System im Westen Polens
> errichtet werden, so dass bei einem Angriff des Iran diese Raketen
> (mit AtomGefechtsKopf) über Polen abgeschossen werden. Wohl mit
> starken Auswirkungen für Deutschland.
Wozu diese Raketenstellung in Polen vermutlich dient, kannst du hier
sehen:
http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/images/abmmap3.jpg
"Russia’s Real Concerns Today
Most of the current debate has focused on whether the missile defense
system could disrupt Russia’s deterrent against the United States.
Although this may be a concern to Russian planners in the long run,
their objections probably have more to do with the capability of the
system to disrupt limited strikes against France or the United
Kingdom. Russian nuclear strike plans against each of those smaller
nuclear powers probably include only a few ICBMs, but their flight
path would take them right over the planned interceptors (Figure 5).
Figure 5:
Trajectories for Hypothetical Russian European Strikes
The Russian objections to the proposed US anti-ballistic missile
defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic seem more linked to
potential Russian strike plans against British and French nuclear
forces than to strike plans against the United States. The
trajectories for a hypothetical ICBM attack against French and
British nuclear submarines bases pass over the proposed U.S. missile
defense system in Europe.
Russian planners are probably also thinking ahead. By 2015, under
current plans, Russia’s ICBM force is expected to have declined from
about 480 missiles today to approximately 150. Significantly less
than the 450 the United States plans to retain. This, of course, will
have no real implications for Russia’s security, but for Russian
planners it means that a European ballistic missile defense system
with 10 interceptors (that could quickly be expanded) and 21
interceptors at Fort Greely in Alaska (and silos already dug for
more) suddenly doesn’t seem so limited anymore. Indeed, if Russia’s
statements about targeting a future missile defense system in Europe
are genuine, then the U.S. interceptors in Alaska are probably
already targeted by Russian missiles."
http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2007/07/targeting_missile_defense_syst.ph
p
> Was meint ihr:
> 1) Kann dieses System Russland wirklich "gefährlich" werden?
Ja, das US-amerikanische ABM-System soll die USA in die Lage
versetzen, ungestraft einen Erstschlag gegen Russland und China
auszuführen.
"The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy
By Keir A. Lieber and Daryl G. Press
From Foreign Affairs, March/April 2006
...
If the United States launched a nuclear attack against Russia (or
China), the targeted country would be left with a tiny surviving
arsenal -- if any at all. At that point, even a relatively modest or
inefficient missile-defense system might well be enough to protect
against any retaliatory strikes, because the devastated enemy would
have so few warheads and decoys left.
..."
http://web.archive.org/web/20060406055430/http://www.foreignaffairs.o
rg/20060301faessay85204/keir-a-lieber-daryl-g-press/the-rise-of-u-s-n
uclear-primacy.html?mode=print
> 2) Sind bei einem Abschuss Schäden in Polen / Deutschland denkbar?
Sicher. Bei einem US-Angriff gegen Russland wären die US-Stützpunkte
in Polen und Deutschland aber sowieso Ziel eines Gegenschlags.
> Kennt jemand die Reichweite der AbwehrRaketen? Soweit ich die
> WerbeGrafiken richtig deute soll dieses System im Westen Polens
> errichtet werden, so dass bei einem Angriff des Iran diese Raketen
> (mit AtomGefechtsKopf) über Polen abgeschossen werden. Wohl mit
> starken Auswirkungen für Deutschland.
Wozu diese Raketenstellung in Polen vermutlich dient, kannst du hier
sehen:
http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/images/abmmap3.jpg
"Russia’s Real Concerns Today
Most of the current debate has focused on whether the missile defense
system could disrupt Russia’s deterrent against the United States.
Although this may be a concern to Russian planners in the long run,
their objections probably have more to do with the capability of the
system to disrupt limited strikes against France or the United
Kingdom. Russian nuclear strike plans against each of those smaller
nuclear powers probably include only a few ICBMs, but their flight
path would take them right over the planned interceptors (Figure 5).
Figure 5:
Trajectories for Hypothetical Russian European Strikes
The Russian objections to the proposed US anti-ballistic missile
defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic seem more linked to
potential Russian strike plans against British and French nuclear
forces than to strike plans against the United States. The
trajectories for a hypothetical ICBM attack against French and
British nuclear submarines bases pass over the proposed U.S. missile
defense system in Europe.
Russian planners are probably also thinking ahead. By 2015, under
current plans, Russia’s ICBM force is expected to have declined from
about 480 missiles today to approximately 150. Significantly less
than the 450 the United States plans to retain. This, of course, will
have no real implications for Russia’s security, but for Russian
planners it means that a European ballistic missile defense system
with 10 interceptors (that could quickly be expanded) and 21
interceptors at Fort Greely in Alaska (and silos already dug for
more) suddenly doesn’t seem so limited anymore. Indeed, if Russia’s
statements about targeting a future missile defense system in Europe
are genuine, then the U.S. interceptors in Alaska are probably
already targeted by Russian missiles."
http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2007/07/targeting_missile_defense_syst.ph
p
> Was meint ihr:
> 1) Kann dieses System Russland wirklich "gefährlich" werden?
Ja, das US-amerikanische ABM-System soll die USA in die Lage
versetzen, ungestraft einen Erstschlag gegen Russland und China
auszuführen.
"The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy
By Keir A. Lieber and Daryl G. Press
From Foreign Affairs, March/April 2006
...
If the United States launched a nuclear attack against Russia (or
China), the targeted country would be left with a tiny surviving
arsenal -- if any at all. At that point, even a relatively modest or
inefficient missile-defense system might well be enough to protect
against any retaliatory strikes, because the devastated enemy would
have so few warheads and decoys left.
..."
http://web.archive.org/web/20060406055430/http://www.foreignaffairs.o
rg/20060301faessay85204/keir-a-lieber-daryl-g-press/the-rise-of-u-s-n
uclear-primacy.html?mode=print
> 2) Sind bei einem Abschuss Schäden in Polen / Deutschland denkbar?
Sicher. Bei einem US-Angriff gegen Russland wären die US-Stützpunkte
in Polen und Deutschland aber sowieso Ziel eines Gegenschlags.