US plan for euro missile shield stall

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States warned Poland Tuesday it could turn to other countries if talks with Warsaw on hosting part of a US missile defense shield do not advance.

and

WARSAW, June 19 (RIA Novosti) - The Czech opposition has gathered over 100,000 signatures in support of a proposal to hold a national referendum on the placement of a U.S. early-warning radar in the Czech Republic, an opposition spokesperson said on Thursday.
The agreement between Prague and Washington, which was officially approved by the Czech government on May 21, is expected be ratified by the end of 2008

the czech `deal` will go to court and the country - where it will be thrown out , likewise poland are wavering over the outcome of supporting the USA in such a way; these make for `interesting times` to quote the chinese proverb.

Nice one, the tabls are really turning as it seems. Maybe because the US is starting to come apart economically, taking the rest of the world with it. Let's hope this will keep on in more aspects of our world.

Yay for common sense and resisting citizens!

That's logic for you, refusing to protect yourself, petty Europeans.

Originally posted by WestPoint23 That's logic for you, refusing to protect yourself, petty Europeans.

Westy, I expect better from someone like you. Shame on you Sir, for not realising that apart from the UK, not every European wants to kow-tow to you Americans.

Lets be honest Westy. If it had not been for our involvment with you in GW II and Afghanistan, we would not have such a terrorist threat in this country.

Personally, I could'nt give a damn about some huge radar installation and the possibility of becoming a target during a pre-emptive strike, and I believe it is 'that' which worries some European countries.

I live 8 miles from the biggest target in the UK - the 'Doughnut' that is the GCHQ site at Cheltenham.

From a purely military point of view, is such a system worth installing and, perhaps quite as important, can the US actually afford the thing in the first place?

Is it 'pointing' in the right direction? I believe China poses a bigger threat that a resurging Russia, but thats just my opinion!

[edit on 2-7-2008 by fritz]

reply to post by WestPoint23


To be honest, I don't think having russian nuclear forces targeting you is protecting yourself, especially considering you can do nothing to protect yourself. I, of course, mean SS-26 and manuevering warheads, and if anyone is concerned about the range, russian forces stated they will revive IRBM, if USA goes ahead with plans to deploy missile shield, those will have enough range.

Europe has existed for much longer than USA, it will manage to save itself, I don't think americans should worry. In case the real trouble comes by, I think countries like Germany will rather cooperate with Russia on something Anti-missile, since Russia can deploy missiles much closer to the supposed launch site and already has radars overseeing the countries, which, according to USA might be willing to launch something.

And, above all of course, Russia pioneered ABM, and demonstrated to have (although limited) but somewhat effective defence, while even one of the candidates for president of US admits the reliability of this new american "shield" is dubious. Regarding the elections actually, what is the point of negotiating? Obama will still cancel everything before Bush will be able to build anything at all.

Please stop going on the line of thread that our shield is for Russia.
Even most Russian Generals recognize that an ABM Shield in Europe would, at-most, fire five to ten warheads within any significant frame of reference.

Russia has tens of thousands.

Why can't people just use simple logic.

Originally posted by WestPoint23
That's logic for you, refusing to protect yourself, petty Europeans.

The emphasis is important. Protecting ourselves, not letting us be protected by another, not in this way. The rocketshield is to unreliable for the amount of money that goes into it. There are two possibilities; One, Iran Stopped developing nukes > no shield needed. Two Iran will have one in 6 months > shield will be to late.

So, lets go for the cheaper option.

[edit on 3-7-2008 by Harman]

Lets face it ... Who was the shield really for? Europe or the US?
I dont think its Europe, do you?

I don't think it's a matter of the launch sites, It's a matter of where these shot-down ICBM's fall.

I Love living in Canada! The Rockets streaking overhead completes any day!

reply to post by WestPoint23


I know you are a firm hater of Europeans, but what you are saying is utterly nonsense.

This missile shield should come there for one reason and one reason only: American interest. Your cruel government doesn't care a damn about its own people let alone about Europeans. If it was to protect Europeans against Iranian missile attacks, so many other locations would have been strategically much better, such as Greece. Even Russia offered a location.

That missile shield is there to show Russia America's muscle flexing.




[edit on 4-7-2008 by Mdv2]

Anyone who thinks the US Missile Shield is there to protect Europe is a fool. It is there to protect the continental US, nothing more. Europe is there to act as a buffer zone and to soak up some of the nukes.

its official - Poland says NO


uk.news.yahoo.com...

WARSAW (Reuters) - Poland rejected as insufficient on Friday a U.S. offer to boost its air defences in return for basing a "missile shield" on its territory but said it remained open to further talks with Washington.

The decision by Poland, a staunchly pro-American NATO ally, is a setback for the Bush administration's plans for global missile defence, which is intended to counter possible threats from what Washington calls "rogue states", particularly Iran.

This proves my theory that the Cold War is not over. If the CW was over, then why would the US need to install a missile shield in Europe and why do both countries (Russia and the US) have nukes that can be prepped and ready in 15 mins?

Originally posted by Harlequin
its official - Poland says NO

wow.. Russian pressure that strong?

reply to post by Daedalus3


think they listen to france/germany more nowadays tbh.

Originally posted by WestPoint23
That's logic for you, refusing to protect yourself, petty Europeans.

So you think it is right that the Czech republic or Poland gets attacked preemptively to disable these systems in order to attack the US?

I think you are the one that is being petty in your views my friend.

If Poland or the Czech republic wanted to install such a system in the US after 50 years of bad relations with China, im sure you wouldn't be saying that about your country folk.

its 537 miles from warsaw to bucharest - and since the maximum range of the iranian missiles barely touches romania let alone 500 miles north in poland - they don`t want to play the game the USA is doing with russia.

I am now of the opinion, rightly or wrongly, that the proposed missile shield has nothing at all to do with what missiles Iran may or may not have.

I firmly believe the paranonia about missiles stems from a resurgent Russia and the way she is seen to be rearming herself.

Surely a well equipped and semi-professional armed forces in Russia and the [supposed] threat that Europe would face, is much more of a threat to the USA than any bunch of second class missiles [real or imaginary] that Iran may possess.

Europe needs to start distancing itself from the US (without walking out of the room all together) and align itself more strategically with China and Russia in order to seal our future under a more diplomatic and economic future.

The US has too many sinister and dark elements to it, that China and Russia are starting to look like neutral countries in comparison. We don't need nor do we want nuclear weapons strewn across Eastern Europe whilst compromising our security. As another poster has said, a handful of 'missile shield' weapons are no match for tens of thousands. The act of placing such as system is less effective than it's purpose.

IMHO, the US are not acting in our best interest, and with the current administration's war efforts and illegalities, we can ill afford to play best friends with someone that we no longer trust.

Of course, what I believe and what will happen are often two different things.

Breifne