It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Barack Obama surrenders to Russia on Missile Defence

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by jtma508
How myopic some people are. The whole ABM thing was a major irritant, a massive financial boondogle and a generally bad idea. If those countries feel they need to be protected let thme deal with it. We have enough problems here at home. The naive here can't seem to grasp that this is only about someone making a great deal of money. Does nothing about defense for anyone. Ronnie Reagan's Star Wars redux.


Yeah.. we have to do things like finance the -$7,220,000,000 loss that Fannie Mae took in security transactions for FY 08. Or the -$867,000,000 for 2007, -$867,000,000 of 2006 etc...




posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 01:34 PM
link   
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.



posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by drwizardphd
Face it, if he had approved putting up the missile shield, you guys would just be bitching about him spending money.


There was nothing for him to "approve." All the approvals had already been done. All he had to do was sit down, shut the hell up, and allow the projects to be completed. I know, Obama shutting up? Yeah, that's gonna happen...


As for saving us money, if he scraps the things entirely, he's actually wasted all the taxpayer dollars already invested in the program. That's no "savings" because we'll have absolutely NOTHING to show for that investment... of course investing with no returns seems to be an ongoing theme for this admin, so...



posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 02:20 PM
link   
ttp://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/09/president-obama-announces-new-missile-defense-plan-will-be-stronger-smarter-and-swifter.html

If pasting the link above worked it should give you a better idea of what is going on.

The story is that he's replacing an old system with a new mobile one that will make it easier to use against Iran should the need arise.

That makes me even more concerned about what is soon to happen with Israel and Iran and the USA being put right into the thick of it.



posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whatthehell?
ttp://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/09/president-obama-announces-new-missile-defense-plan-will-be-stronger-smarter-and-swifter.html

If pasting the link above worked it should give you a better idea of what is going on.

The story is that he's replacing an old system with a new mobile one that will make it easier to use against Iran should the need arise.

That makes me even more concerned about what is soon to happen with Israel and Iran and the USA being put right into the thick of it.


I cannot get to that link.



posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 03:41 PM
link   
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.



posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 03:47 PM
link   
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.



posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 07:46 PM
link   

It's a bone.



1) Iran has demonstrated an orbital object capability. Getting the de-orbit point right is the next step for a ballistic missile.

2) Even though the IAEA denies it, one of their secret memos states:


A breaking news report released by the Associated Press just moments ago, claims that they have seen a “secret report” in which the International Atomic Energy Agency agrees with Washington’s fears that Iran has the capabilities to manufacture a nuclear bomb. The “secret report” also concludes that Iran is currently working on producing a missile which is capable of carrying a nuclear warhead.


www.google.com...

3) As ATS noted here Netanyahu disapeared for ten hours.

Turns out, he went to Russia.

www.google.com...



So... This may very well be a bone to get Russia to play nice with Israel when whatever is gonna happen between those two comes into play.



posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 07:51 PM
link   
Great news! Finally we have a President that actually is willing to talk to our adversaries rather than provoke them. Of course alot of you will see that as being cowardly or being weak. I see it as a sign of strength. We need to get along in this world. War is obsolete.



posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by dooper
And another Democrat President craps on more of our friends.

Every single time we get a panty-waist liberal President, not only do they bend us over for a good rooting, but they make the US out to be one fickle "ally."

Then we have to have a Conservative come in and play "catch up."

What a damn mess this guy is making.

Amateur hour. And he's the star.



Same coin, different side.


Oh it's you Dooper. It's good to see you. i see you haven't changed. Salary gone up?


Wink wink



posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 07:55 PM
link   
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]



posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 07:59 PM
link   
Cant say if this is bad news... or good news.

on one hand the defense shield is supposed to protect Europe from incoming ICBM's and possible ICBM's that go north over the north pole to strike us Targets...

Although on the other hand, this might improve relations with Russia...

IM mixed on this...



posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by drwizardphd
Face it, if he had approved putting up the missile shield, you guys would just be bitching about him spending money.


Hell, no!! I wanted him to approve it! I'd have been the first one putting "Poland" on my reassignment sheet before the ink on the agreement had dried.

I mean, have you see Eastern European women? Hot!!! I fly with a woman who's 100% Polish and she's smoking!!!


Originally posted by drwizardphd
I think this is a rare win for Obama, we need to be spending less, and this is exactly what he is doing. You supposed 'conservatives' should love this move, as he's taken the fiscally conservative position.


So it's OK to bail out the banks, the auto industry, the mortgage companies, etc, and spend untold trillions of dollars that the American people are NOT going to get back? And it's OK to screw over the Poles, probably one of our few remaining friends in that region???



posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 08:19 PM
link   
It is interesting that people still think Iran was the main reason for the ABM system in Europe. Fact is, that Iran has no missiles capable of reaching anywhere in Europe. Furthermore there is no proof of any kind that Iran is developing ICBMs capable of reaching either Europe or US. US's own military sources disclosed that Iran is only researching short-to-medium range missiles.

To develop an ICBM capable of reaching Europe would take Iran many years, considering that it has absolutely no experience with that technology. And why would Iran even need to strike Europe - what enemies does it have there?

To develop an ICBM capable of reaching the US would take Iran longer than a decade. Very few countries have ICBMs with such range, and it took them many decades and very extensive experience to develop such technology.


In short - the ABM proposals for Poland and Czech Republic were never intended to intercept Iranian missiles, especially considering in how much of a rush the Bush administration was to place them there.



posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by guardstarr
Great news! Finally we have a President that actually is willing to talk to our adversaries rather than provoke them. Of course alot of you will see that as being cowardly or being weak. I see it as a sign of strength. We need to get along in this world. War is obsolete.


Neville Chamberlain thought that very same thing. Look where it got him.



posted on Sep, 18 2009 @ 12:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by reassor
im from Poland and i think this is awesome news.
what is first target when war starts?
yes defenses


i bet its due to usa internal problems ($$$) not that im happy about this part .


so you prefer not to have defenses?
like that will keep your country safe

[edit on 18-9-2009 by Alien Mind]



posted on Sep, 18 2009 @ 12:57 AM
link   

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]



posted on Sep, 18 2009 @ 03:41 AM
link   
I find it funny that people speak as though this is a slap in the face to ex-Soviet states.

The missile shield was not supposed to have anything to do with them, it was about "protecting Europe from Iran". Admitting that it was nothing more than a political tool, is admitting wrong-doing.

I for one welcome that Obama doesn't want to stupidly waste money and raise regional tensions and contribute to an arms build-up for no useful purpose.

If anything, Europe is safer because of this, as now Russia doesn't need to invade/bomb Poland and Czechoslovakia in the event of any smaller conflict where the missile shield could come into play.



posted on Sep, 18 2009 @ 03:45 AM
link   
You guys are funny. Everyone knows USA already have space based lasers that can take down nukes. The 'missile defense' was just a lame cover. Russia already had multiwarhead missiles that could evade ground based interceptors anyway. Any you chide Obama for not wanting to spend 100's of billions on this lame system.



posted on Sep, 18 2009 @ 09:52 AM
link   
Appeasing Russia was the worst thing BHO could do. ANyway, he is a traitor and has spat on Reagan's missile legacy. This has only served to embolden the Russkies and make them determined to take Eastern Europe by force.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join