Why are Russia getting worried about 10 Interceptor missiles?

Question

I'm no expert, but i assume that a missile designed to wipe out an Iranian nuke would not cause huge amounts of damage, so why are the Russian government (A country that owns 10,000 nukes) are worrying about 10 Interceptors?

Answer 1

Its a missile site which could fire anything It depends what warhead you put on the missile .To swap one for another would not be difficult.Perhaps Bush should look up "Cuba 1962" and see what comes up.

    

Answer 2

Because they only got a baseball bat as an interceptor. The last parade in Moscow relieve the black and white tv era.

Answer 3

Because

1. We signed a treaty to not build a Missile Defence system.  Its called a Nuclear Detterent.  By building weapons designed to limit its effectiveness, it is just restarting the cold war.  

2.  Why do these weapons need to be built in Russia's back yard.  Iran is over a thousand miles south.  

3.  Why would Poland be the target of Iran

4.  Many of the ICBMS carry multiple warheads.

5.  By building weapons designed to stop ICBMS, it gives an incentive to stop decreasing the nuclear stockpile.  

It is not about the 10 interceptors, it is about the start of a real threat.  Look at the Cuban missile crisis, Russia stated a few nuclear weapons in Cuba, but we were prepared to go to nuclear war because it would limit our reaction to a nuclear attack.  The same can be said for these rockets being in close proximity to the launch sites.  It starts with 10 interceptors and quickly manifests into hundreds, thousands of missiles.  The United States has at least 30 of these in deployment.  Once the gimicks have been fixed, who knows how many we will built and deploy?

Answer 4

Short and medium range ballistic missiles cannot be intercepted until after their burn phase which is the first part of their trip to their target. The rocket basically thrusts it way up into space then lets gravity do the rest. Because of this you need a large distance away from the point of launch to intercept a fast moving object.

Think about this. If someone stood right next to you and threw a ball over your head and behind you and you wanted to throw your own ball to catch and hit the thrown ball. You would have to "chase" the thrown ball with your ball to catch up to it. Now if this person stood 25 feet away and threw the ball so that it didn't go behind you the whole time it was in the air, you would have a much better chance of hitting it because you are not "chasing" it this time. You are intercepting it from an angle by throwing the ball where you think the other ball will be when you want the two to meet.

This concept applies to ballistic missiles and anti ballistic missiles. ABM's simply can't chase ballistic missiles into orbit and catch them. They have to shoot at an angle so that the ABM can lead its target before it gets there.

This explains why the US wants to put the weapon in Poland. Look on any map of that side of the world and draw a straight line from Iran to France or UK or even Iraq. Now look at Poland's angle to that line. That's why the system needs to be there. If it were in Iraq, it would be chasing the whole time. If Russia launched short or medium range missiles it would be chasing the whole time.

So I don't know why their making such a big fuss about it. Perhaps it's because they think they still own Poland.

Answer 5

Well if these missiles are designed to knock out Iranian nukes just why are they placing them in Europe would it not make more sense to place them in Iraq, Iran's neighbours where America are currently entrenched...........of course not because it has nothing to do with Iran its all to do with keeping Russia in check !!

Answer 6

10 here and ten there and pretty soon they have real problems.