WW3 Scenario: Vladimir Putin Warns Retaliation Against US Missiles In Romania

WW3 Scenario: Vladimir Putin Warns Retaliation Against US Missiles In Romania
Vladimir Putin President of Russia / Website CC by 4.0
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on Google+
Share on LinkedIn
Pin to Pinterest
Share on StumbleUpon
What's This?

Russian President Vladimir Putin says that the deployment of U.S. missile defense components in Romania means that Russia would have to respond with retaliatory measures.


Earlier this month, the Department of Defense announced the inauguration of the Aegis Ashore ballistic missile defense site in Deveselu, Romania. The site is located in a former Romanian airbase and is reportedly meant to address the development and deployment of ballistic missiles by Iran.

According to Deputy Defense Secretary Bob Work, Iran has been “very aggressive” when it comes to ballistic missile development in recent times and for the 28-member NATO alliance, this can spell out trouble.

The inauguration ceremony meant that the Deveselu site has been given operation certification. It is equipped with radar and interceptors that can readily provide ballistic-missile deterrent coverage to all of southern Europe. The Aegis Ashore site is actually part of NATO’s larger ballistic missile system with the Aegis ballistic missile defense system providing land-based capability.

Like us on Facebook

The ballistic missile defense tracking radar is in Turkey, the NATO command-and-control center is in Germany and four U.S. Aegis ballistic missile defense ships have been homeported in Rota, Spain.

In response to the development of the Aegis site in Romania, Putin announced in a press conference, “We will be forced to react in the proper way. Before, certain parts of the Romanian territory were unaware of what it is like to be a target. Today we will have to take certain measures to maintain our security.”

According to Russian news agency TASS, Putin also pointed out that the missiles in Romania currently have a range of 500 kilometers. However, this can extend to 1,000 kilometers in several years time. “What is still worse, these compact systems may be armed with attack missiles right away. And these missiles have a range of 2,400 kilometers,” he further explained.

From the beginning, the U.S. has been quick to explain that the Aegis site is not something that Russia has to worry about. Work stressed, “This site, nor the site in Poland, has any capability — none whatsoever — to undermine Russia’s strategic deterrent. It is a defensive system. It is fully compliant with existing arms control regimes.”

The deputy Defense secretary also pointed out that Moscow is aware that geography and physics mean it is “impossible” for the Aegis system to undermine Russia’s strategic deterrent. Moreover, Work also said that Russian officials are aware that the system is not directed at Russia.

Also read: WW3 Scenario: US Risks Collision With Civilian Planes Over Russia’s Border

If you want more World news, subscribe to our newsletter or follow us on Twitter and Facebook.


  • Gray Liddell

    Why is the US prodding the Russian bear?
    Do we want WW3?
    Who are our leaders in this suicidal push?

    Can’t we realize that after WW2 we had 50% pf the world’s GDP, now we only have 20%. Now we cannot afford anything other than our own sphere of influence. Our problem is world wide. Let China and Russia have their spheres of influence. Yet we persist in pushing. Why?

    Here is our own ambassador discussing how we lied to the Russians and mismanaged that relationship.Why?


    • patrick

      People like you said “Let Nazi Germany” have their sphere if influance also….. look what happened

      Russia has been very aggressive to their non-Nato neighbors…..and as for lying…. I remember Putin saying the “Little Green Men” in Crimea was a local self defense force and not Russian Federation Soldiers

      And your source, Global Research, also claims North Korea is a modern day paradise…..

      North Korea, a Land of Human Achievement, Love and Joy

      • Gray Liddell

        How about the New York Times?

        From a 2009 NYT article discussing the ‘gentleman’s agreement’
        that Gorbachev understood as meaning no NATO expansion, applying to his
        agreeing to German reunification

        “Did the United States betray
        Russia at the dawn of the post-cold war era? The short answer is no.
        Nothing legally binding emerged from the negotiations over German
        unification. In fact, in September 1990, an embattled Mr. Gorbachev
        signed the accords that allowed NATO to extend itself over the former
        East Germany in exchange for financial assistance from Bonn to Moscow. A
        longer answer, however, shows that there were mixed messages and
        diplomatic ambiguities.

        By acknowledging that there might be some substance to Russian
        grievances, the Obama administration would strengthen our relations with
        Moscow. Given that NATO enlargement has already taken place (and
        efforts for further expansion are stalled), little would be lost with
        such an acknowledgment but much could be gained.”

        C’mon the US is a land of litigious slick lawyers, the
        Russians aren’t. Our Elite go to law school to learn to lie. Basically
        the Russians mistakenly think when a person gives their word it means
        But we better watch out for the Big Bad Bear, that is why we spend 14 times more money on military stuff than that badass,
        the Russian bear.? or is it bear cub?

        See Wikipedia ‘List of Countries by Military Expenditures”