Started By
Message

Did Z/NATO exploit the SALT Treaty with Russia?

Posted on 6/2/25 at 8:27 am
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
133669 posts
Posted on 6/2/25 at 8:27 am
quote:

First the cliff notes version: There’s an important detail to remember. People are laughing at the long-range Russian bombers being left out in the open, vulnerable to attack. However, the bomber visibility is required as part of several nuclear agreements between the USA and Russia (SALT and START). Our U.S. long range nuclear capable bombers, covered under the same agreements, are also visible.
Ukraine President Zelenskyy is playing with fire by targeting them, which also explains why Zelenskyy never told President Trump in advance.

The U.S and NATO have provided the means. However, #1) did Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy just exploit a vulnerability by targeting Russian long-range nuclear capable bombers? and #2) was the CIA and NATO intelligence community a willfully blind participant knowing they would benefit?

Both the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT) and the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), call for U.S. and Russian long range nuclear capable bombers to remain “visible and observable by national technical means of verification.” That open visibility creates a mutual vulnerability as well as a method of surveillance and verification for both the USA and Russian Federation.


Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and by extension his NATO enablers, just exploited that SALT/START vulnerability and used drones to attack Russian bombers covered by USA-Russia treaties. There are reports (and videos) now surfacing from inside Russia showing the Russian Federation moving strategic long-range mobile missile launchers into position for a counterattack against Ukraine.

This situation is obviously very fluid and let us all hope that President Trump and President Putin are in communication about this escalation as created by Zelenskyy and his enablers, even if -and probably especially if- our own intelligence agencies are part of the enabling.

Think about the ramifications of NATO enabled Ukraine targeting major Russian military assets which are vulnerable only because they are part of a previously agreed U.S-Russia negotiation to remain vulnerable. In essence, an argument can be made by Russia that NATO -and by extension us- have targeted nuclear capable missile systems, and those systems were protected by the SALT/START treaties. How would we respond of an adversary launched a strike against our strategic long-range nuclear capable bombers in the USA?


LINK
This post was edited on 6/2/25 at 8:29 am
Posted by 14&Counting
Dallas, TX
Member since Jul 2012
40204 posts
Posted on 6/2/25 at 8:30 am to
Putin violated the Budapest Memorandum where Russia promised not to invade Ukraine in exchange for giving up their nuclear weapons.
Posted by sta4ever
Member since Aug 2014
17001 posts
Posted on 6/2/25 at 8:34 am to
Well maybe Russia shouldn’t have started a war and they wouldn’t have to worry about these kinds of things.
Posted by dafif
Member since Jan 2019
7175 posts
Posted on 6/2/25 at 8:34 am to
I would refuse to provide or anything else to Ukraine and walk away based on this

Also, I cannot believe our new BBB has any money going to Ukraine

We are all being fed packs of lies as our government just continues to screw over the people
Posted by LARancher1991
Baton Rouge
Member since Jul 2015
1488 posts
Posted on 6/2/25 at 8:35 am to
Short answer is no Ukraine can't violate a treaty it's not a part of. The SALT treaty was signed in 1972 when Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union. The START treaty was signed in 1991 between the US and Russia. Also neither one of these treaty's state that attacks can't be carried out of these bombers Also neither treaty states bombers themselves have to be visible only that their base of operations does. Example they can't be stored and launched from inside a mountain or underground facility.
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
133669 posts
Posted on 6/2/25 at 8:37 am to
quote:

Putin violated the Budapest Memorandum where Russia promised not to invade Ukraine in exchange for giving up their nuclear weapons.




Oh, we are doing this.

I'm more worried about Z/NATO going behind Trump's back and what kind of position that put's the president in.
Posted by NC_Tigah
Make Orwell Fiction Again
Member since Sep 2003
131503 posts
Posted on 6/2/25 at 8:40 am to
quote:

Did Z/NATO exploit the SALT Treaty with Russia?
No. Russia suspended its START treaty participation in early 2023.
Posted by VOR
Member since Apr 2009
65802 posts
Posted on 6/2/25 at 8:40 am to
Do you work for Russian Foreign Service? Sounds like it.

The constant support for Russian aggression on
this board has been mystifying. Sounds like too many people have been gobbling up internet propaganda.
Posted by BHTiger
Charleston
Member since Dec 2017
7142 posts
Posted on 6/2/25 at 8:44 am to
I an no supporter of Zelensky..........Russia started this mess.
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
133669 posts
Posted on 6/2/25 at 8:45 am to
quote:

Do you work for Russian Foreign Service? Sounds like it.

The constant support for Russian aggression on
this board has been mystifying. Sounds like too many people have been gobbling up internet propaganda.


Are you not interested in the escalation and the position that has forced Trump into and maybe without his knowledge especially while he is trying to negotiate peace?
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
133669 posts
Posted on 6/2/25 at 8:47 am to
quote:

I an no supporter of Zelensky..........Russia started this mess.


Everyone is missing the point of this thread.

This is about exploiting an existing treaty between the U.S. and Russia and putting the president in a bad spot.
Posted by NC_Tigah
Make Orwell Fiction Again
Member since Sep 2003
131503 posts
Posted on 6/2/25 at 8:48 am to
quote:

Well maybe Russia shouldn’t have started a war
Right.
Russia should not have ignited the powder keg when they concocted the Euromaidan to overthrow a democratically elected Ukrainian President in 2014.




Oh ... wait!




Posted by boosiebadazz
Member since Feb 2008
82849 posts
Posted on 6/2/25 at 8:50 am to
quote:

Everyone is missing the point of this thread.

This is about exploiting an existing treaty between the U.S. and Russia and putting the president in a bad spot.


Your thread is stupid because you’ve been transparently in the tank for the Russian point of view since they invaded.

It’s further retarded because it’s infantalizing the President of the US, the most powerful man in the world. To hear you guys tell it, he’s the most alpha guy on the planet and makes others tremble with his machismo but yet the mean old deep state just keeps getting over on him and he’s powerless to do anything about it.

Posted by TigerAxeOK
Where I lay my head is home.
Member since Dec 2016
32365 posts
Posted on 6/2/25 at 8:50 am to
quote:

We are all being fed packs of lies as our government just continues to screw over the people since the 1950s.
Posted by Tmcgin
BATON ROUGE
Member since Jun 2010
5968 posts
Posted on 6/2/25 at 8:51 am to
300,000 Russian casualties and he's not closer
to Kyiv than he was the first night

Putin can't beat anyone....he's that big a cluster

Russia had a treaty with Ukraine to have them give up Nukes
Posted by LARancher1991
Baton Rouge
Member since Jul 2015
1488 posts
Posted on 6/2/25 at 8:52 am to
Was a loophole in the treaty exploited possibly. But like I mentioned in my previous post no part of the treaty was breached. Even with US help to carry out the operation no part of the treaty was breached.
Posted by supadave3
Houston, TX
Member since Dec 2005
31175 posts
Posted on 6/2/25 at 8:56 am to
I never knew that bombers had to be visible. That’s surprising.

It’s pretty obvious that we shared this info with Ukraine and there will be ramifications for that.

I don’t see peace coming anyone soon but I’m often wrong regarding this Ukraine/Russia deal.

I remember actively trying to convince others that this entire conflict would be over in a week and that it was just a blip on the global radar.
Posted by Bunk Moreland
Member since Dec 2010
62836 posts
Posted on 6/2/25 at 8:58 am to
If he had a problem with Miss Lindsey, Da Nang Dick, and Pompeo going over there, he would have lit them up on social media. Or, I'm guessing he could have had State stop the trip for the senators. Maybe Trump is not the anti-interventionist we thought he was?
This post was edited on 6/2/25 at 9:00 am
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
133669 posts
Posted on 6/2/25 at 8:58 am to
quote:

Your thread is stupid because you’ve been transparently in the tank for the Russian point of view since they invaded.

It’s further retarded because it’s infantalizing the President of the US, the most powerful man in the world. To hear you guys tell it, he’s the most alpha guy on the planet and makes others tremble with his machismo but yet the mean old deep state just keeps getting over on him and he’s powerless to do anything about it.



So besides your feathers ruffled this morning what does Trump do in this situation?
Posted by Decatur
Member since Mar 2007
30371 posts
Posted on 6/2/25 at 9:01 am to
quote:

Your thread is stupid because you’ve been transparently in the tank for the Russian point of view since they invaded.


Gumbopot has been an OG Tankie since he started posting here. “Oh noes this puts Trump in such a bad position omg” lol
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram