Barack Obama surrenders to Russia on Missile Defence, page 2
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 5 times


reply posted on 17-9-2009 @ 01:34 PM by john124
With missile move, Obama hands Russia a gift

President Barack Obama essentially handed Russia a gift on Thursday with his decision to roll back a planned U.S. missile defense in eastern Europe.

The Russian government had loudly protested U.S. plans begun by Obama's predecessor, Republican George W. Bush, to deploy an anti-missile system in eastern Europe that the United States insisted had been aimed at defending against a potential missile attack from Iran.

Obama's decision to shift the focus to defending against Iran's short and medium-term missile capabilities instead meant there would be no need to deploy the missile shield systems in the Czech Republic and Poland that so alarmed Russia.

'WEAKNESS AND NAIVETE'

The president has been seeking Russian help in stiffening U.N. sanctions against Iran over a nuclear weapons program Tehran denies having, but so far Moscow has shown no signs of softening its resistance to more sanctions.

The administration stressed that its decision was not based on any anticipated concession from Moscow. "This is not about Russia," said White House spokesman Robert Gibbs.

In rejecting U.S. appeals for more Iran sanctions last week, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Moscow did not view the anticipated change in the U.S. missile defense posture as a concession but simply fixing a Bush mistake.

John Bolton, a defense hawk who was Bush's U.N. ambassador, said Obama's decision showed "weakness and naivete."


Sums it up really..... the US should have used this to get an agreement from the Russians to agree to sanctions on Iran. Time will tell whether this has been a mistake, or was the right thing to do.


reply posted on 17-9-2009 @ 03:41 PM by dizzie56
All this is gonna due is allow Russia to keep messin with the rest of Europe over energy. Its all a big scam and we are allowing it to happen. Just look at the South Ossetia war of 2008. What do you think that was about? Energy.

www.nytimes.com...

The above article took place right after that war. Then the russians held hostage pretty much most of europe with a natural gas pipeline deal that wasnt going there way. Its pretty obvious whats going to happen next. Russia will raise the prices on everyone in the region and they will have no recourse. At the very worst, Russia will try and invade somewheres else, allowing the cycle to continue, eventually turning our own allies against us cause we leave them on the wayside.


reply posted on 17-9-2009 @ 03:47 PM by buddhasystem
reply to post by dizzie56



What on Earth does the missile shield have to do with Ossetia? Or Ukraine? Do you honestly believe that tensions of any sort that may exist have the potential to escalate to an all-out strategic missile exchange? Sheesh...

The only way I can interpret your statement is that you are saying that stated purposes of the shield (Iran etc) were actually a sham and the real target was Russia. Well then, in that case they have every right to be royally p!ssed off.


reply posted on 17-9-2009 @ 07:55 PM by maloy
It's about time this idiocy about the ABM shield in Europe as abandoned for good. To those criticizing Obama - consider what the ABM shield in Europe would have accomplished. It would pour a load of taxpayer money into some defense contractor manufacturing and installing the system, and it would irritate Russia and further the rift growing between US and Russia.

What it would NOT realistically accomplish is actual defense objectives - for either the US or its European allies. Why? Russia has too many missiles to be impacted by it; Iran has no missiles capable of reaching anywhere close to Europe let alone the US and if it did then Europe would not be an ideal place to intercept them. Also keep in mind that the biggest defense factor when it comes to nuclear missiles is already in place - it is called Mutually Assured Destruction.



Furthermore, almost everybody conveniently neglected to pay attention to the second part of Obama's speech: US will not abandon missile defense strategy but will instead prioritize continued development of ship-based systems like Aegis. For one thing Aegis is already operational and is much more cost effective than developing a network of unproven land-based systems. In addition to this Aegis defense systems are far more flexible in that the ships can be deployed almost anywhere in the world on short notice, for example near North Korea.

Sure some will perceive Obama's actions as a sign of weakness. That is what US gets for its aggresive military strategy, and unyielding expansion of NATO, that took place over the past 8 years. Now that US attempts to scale down the absurdly expensive projects, it is only expected that there will be some criticism from those accustomed to the arrogant practices of the past.



Also, nobody knows as of yet what concessions if any there are on Russia's side. Don't expect either US or Russia to announce it to the public "we are trading off the ABM system in Europe for Russia's cooperation on Iran and North Korea". For numerous reasons, it will be more discrete and might not be immediate.

For the long-term strategy, this move by Obama is better than continuing to develop the system. Continued development would mean increased military competition and rift in relations with Russia. Maybe the US can afford to upkeep its military industrial complex now, but what happens in 5, 10, 20 years when the debt is through the roof? This absurdity started by Bush must stop somewhere.

[edit on 17-9-2009 by maloy]


reply posted on 18-9-2009 @ 12:57 AM by RoofMonkey
Originally posted by maloy
... Fact is, that Iran has no missiles capable of reaching anywhere in Europe.



WASHINGTON - Iran's launch of a satellite into orbit last week will likely give U.S. and European leaders greater cause for concern that the Islamic republic is approaching the ability to field long-range ballistic missiles while its nuclear program continues to progress, analysts here agreed.

The Iranian government-sponsored Islamic Republic News Agency reported Feb. 3 that Iran had launched a research satellite called Omid into orbit aboard a Safir-2 rocket. This is Iran's first domestically produced satellite to reach orbit and the first to successfully launch on an Iranian-built launch vehicle, according to Press TV, an Iranian government-sponsored news outlet.

...

Satellite watchers using orbital data provided from U.S. Strategic Command's space surveillance network said the satellite is in an elliptical orbit that ranges from 242 kilometers to 382 kilometers in altitude, at an inclination of 55 degrees relative to the equator.


www.space.com...




Sources in the Iranian Space Agency say Omid sole payload was a store and forward telecommunication capability. It had the shape of a 40-centimeter (16 in) cube with mass of 27 kilograms (60 lb)


en.wikipedia.org...


Sputnik, the first man-made satellite, was launched on October 4, 1957 by the U.S.S.R. It was little more than the size of a basketball and weighed 184 pounds. Sputnik was not equipped with any scientific instruments, but orbited the earth once every 98 minutes.

...

Although little of Sputnik's launch was revolutionary by scientific terms, there were several aspects to it that are still important. It was not only the satellite that would be significant in future space exploration, but the rocket used to launch it as well. The rocket utilized the basic rocket principles of Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, which remain crucial to the launching of today's space shuttle. This rocket, known as the R-7, was originally intended to be a ballistic missile.


nhs.needham.k12.ma.us...

In order to make a viable ballistic missile from Ovid's technology... all you need is to ramp it up a bit, add a guidance system, and a way to de-orbit over the city of your choice and detonate it. The propulsion needed to orbit is a wee bit less that that needed to do that whole "ballistic" thing....




Yeah.. no threat there.

[edit on 18-9-2009 by RoofMonkey]
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^




Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Hollow Earth Theory New Evidence.
  General Conspiracies, Posted 17 hours ago, 120 replies
Anonymous show your face!
  Rant, Posted 13 hours ago, 66 replies
I saw a cat turn into a bag..
  The Gray Area, Posted 17 hours ago, 42 replies