Obama jettisons missile shield plans

[seireikhaan]

Obama still continues to lie about the reason for dropping the plan.
Seriously, does anyone believe that? The report that the administration was waving around only concluded that Iran's long-range missile program was 3-5 years behind schedule, not that it was of no concern. And even that NIE is suspect, considering Iran is already far enough along to put a satellite in orbit. The Aegis system is fine, but it's no reason to abandon long-range missile defense.

In its place will be a different missile-defense plan relying on a network of sensors and interceptor missiles based at sea, on land and in the air.

So we've scrapped a missile defense plan in favor of...

a different missile defense plan.

[Xiahou]

So we've scrapped a missile defense plan in favor of...

a different missile defense plan.

Read my post again- this in particular:

The Aegis system is fine, but it's no reason to abandon long-range missile defense.

The Aegis system is designed for in-theatre missile defence. Meaning short to medium range. The planned missiles in Poland were designed for long-range, as in ICBMs.

Both are valuable. Obama isn't replacing the proposed shield with Aegis, he's just flat out abandoning it. The Aegis system has it's roots in the Reagan administration with the SDI- which I believe someone else erroneously called a boondoggle. Before, we were working on both options, now we've dumped the long-range option in an attempt to appease the Russians.

[Tribesman]

considering Iran is already far enough along to put a satellite in orbit.

A rocket that can go up into space is very different from a rocket that can go up and come down again in the right place.
If Russia wanted to put an anti missile defence system in Cuba the same people who are complaining about the cancellaion of the polish base and saying there is nothing wrong with it would be screaming against the provocative plan and calling for action against cuba and russia.

[Meneldil]

A rocket that can go up into space is very different from a rocket that can go up and come down again in the right place.
If Russia wanted to put an anti missile defence system in Cuba the same people who are complaining about the cancellaion of the polish base and saying there is nothing wrong with it would be screaming against the provocative plan and calling for action against cuba and russia.

This. It simply comess down to this, and nothing else.

Had Russia decided to help any latin american country setting up a missile base, the US would have gone 'ZOMG IT'S WAR!!'. But when it's the other way around, it's a 'fine diplomatic move'.

Bollox.

The same can also be said about Iran. Lots of countries buy and get missiles and weapons to supposedly protect themselves while they ain't facing any serious threat (*cough* Israel *cough* Lybia), and it's okay: we make deals, offer them technology and what not. Iran, surrounded by ennemies, and threatened by the world sole superpower (who also happens to be quite a bully) is 'threatening world order' when it tries to prevent any invasion of its territory.

Lack of understanding of international relations + lack of perspective and objectivity = fail.

As for Poland, I say good riddance. Maybe they'll stop bitching about anyone else and try to actually build a real, functionning country.

I also agree with Sarmatian that NATO, the US (and the EU to a lesser degree) are not doing anything to let Russia join the club of democratic & peaceful countries. The US administration never stopped to consider Russia as a threat, despite the fall of USSR. What I fear is that Russia now feels excluded for good and doesn't really want to become part of 'the West' anymore.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Bollox.

No, politics.

[Tribesman]

No, politics.

Politics is bollox

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Politics is bollox

Kind of sums up the thread for me. I have no idea how much I would have to learn before I could have a real opinion on the missile shield.

[Xiahou]

This. It simply comess down to this, and nothing else.

Had Russia decided to help any latin american country setting up a missile base, the US would have gone 'ZOMG IT'S WAR!!'. But when it's the other way around, it's a 'fine diplomatic move'

It'd be pointless on a couple of levels for Russia to setup a missile shield in Latin America. Aside from the US, I'm not aware of any nuclear armed nation or even one that's developing them in the region. A missile shield would be just as useless against the US as it would be against the Russians, so I don't know what there would be to get upset about. On the other hand, Russia is selling other weapons to Latin American countries and no 'ZOMG' yet.

"By the way, we signed some military agreements with Russia. Well ... soon will arrive some little rockets," Chavez said. "We are not going to attack anyone. ... Those are only defense instruments because we are going to defend the nation, from any threat, from wherever it comes."

[HoreTore]

It'd be pointless on a couple of levels for Russia to setup a missile shield in Latin America. Aside from the US, I'm not aware of any nuclear armed nation or even one that's developing them in the region. A missile shield would be just as useless against the US as it would be against the Russians, so I don't know what there would be to get upset about. On the other hand, Russia is selling other weapons to Latin American countries and no 'ZOMG' yet.

Uhm.......

When, exactly, did the US stop caring about mr. Chavez' arsenal and his suppliers...?

EDIT: Also, I think I remember something about some missiles on some caribbean island that washington was rather unhappy about....

[Xiahou]

Uhm.......

When, exactly, did the US stop caring about mr. Chavez' arsenal and his suppliers...?

Wake me when it gets to Defcon: ZOMG ITS WAR!

[drone]

EDIT: Also, I think I remember something about some missiles on some caribbean island that washington was rather unhappy about....

Missiles, yes. Missile shield, no. Russians planting a missile shield in Latin America would not bother us one bit. Our ICBMs fly north over the polar cap to their targets.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

EDIT: Also, I think I remember something about some missiles on some caribbean island that washington was rather unhappy about....

Nuclear missiles at the height of the Cold War vs. missile shield in Poland.

I see no difference.

[seireikhaan]

Read my post again- this in particular:The Aegis system is designed for in-theatre missile defence. Meaning short to medium range. The planned missiles in Poland were designed for long-range, as in ICBMs.

Both are valuable. Obama isn't replacing the proposed shield with Aegis, he's just flat out abandoning it. The Aegis system has it's roots in the Reagan administration with the SDI- which I believe someone else erroneously called a boondoggle. Before, we were working on both options, now we've dumped the long-range option in an attempt to appease the Russians.

1) I dunno, I personally would say that Gates is probably the one I'd be listening to over people not actually in the know.

We are strengthening – not scrapping – missile defense in Europe,” Gates wrote, noting that the previous program would not have been operational until at least 2017 at the earliest and insisted the shift provided “greater flexibility to adapt as new threats develop and old ones recede.”

2) We already have troops in Poland, so its not as though we can't claim retaliation, as was claimed by Furunculus else here earlier in the thread.

3) Poland and the Czech Republic are already in NATO. In other words, Russia won't touch them(militarily, energy being a different deal altogether).

Personally, I feel the whole issue is entirely overblown. And its really irritating to see so many words put into the mouth of others and so many people thinking they know a durned bit more than the Secretary of Defense.

[Furunculus]

Personally, I feel the whole issue is entirely overblown. And its really irritating to see so many words put into the mouth of others and so many people thinking they know a durned bit more than the Secretary of Defense.

3) Poland and the Czech Republic are already in NATO. In other words, Russia won't touch them(militarily, energy being a different deal altogether).

2) We already have troops in Poland, so its not as though we can't claim retaliation, as was claimed by Furunculus else here earlier in the thread.

i have made no claims of the technical competence of this system or the postulated replacement, nor too have i commented on the strategic implications of US security resulting from the change, i have merely pointed out the Polish point of view:

3) defence alliances are all very well, but having lost 20% of their population only 70 years ago because their allies didn't make good on the agreement in time, they remain wary of glib promises from fair weather friends.

2) destroying a strategic missile defense system would be tantamount to declaring an imminent first strike was about to launch, and one should be very wary of giving the slightest inclination of such an act. that represents real security for poland.

this was why Poland wanted the ABM system along with a permanent garrison of US troops manning it.

[Xiahou]

1) I dunno, I personally would say that Gates is probably the one I'd be listening to over people not actually in the know.

Was he also the voice of authority when he said that we needed it when he served Bush? Or a better question- If I had offered a quote of Rumsfeld defending a Bush decision, would you have found it compelling? The Secretary of Defense is a political appointee- it's his job to back his boss's policy.

Besides, what is there to be in the know about? The NIE has been leaked all over the place....

President Barack Obama's decision to scrap a Bush-era missile intercept system in Europe was based largely on a new U.S. intelligence assessment that Iran's effort to build a nuclear-capable long-range missile would take three years to five years longer than originally thought, officials said.
-snip-
The new assessment contends that Iran is unlikely to have a nuclear-capable intercontinental ballistic missile until 2015 to 2020, a U.S. government official familiar with the report told the Associated Press. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the report remains classified.

The original estimate was 2012- the same year that the system in Poland was to be fully deployed.

All of the arrangements had already been made. Who does it benefit to back out now?

If you want your silly missile defense, Xiahou, then build it in your own territory but NIMBY!
Oh wait, it doesn't work at all then.

When will you Germans learn? Poland isn't your backyard. It hasn't been for a long time now.

We already have the missile shield deployed in our own territory- it's called Alaska.