Rancor, relief on missile shield plan

Glad to hear this.

But, no matter what, someone is not going to be happy.



Apparently this was a Bush idea but obama is canceling it. I say good for him. We dont' need another base. We don't need to spend the money. And we need an ally out of Russia.

What are your (mature) and thought out thoughts on this?

Thank you for posting.

linky

reply to post by nixie_nox

---

Realistically, if a rogue state wanted to deliver a nuke to the US or a Western country, they wouldn't do it by way of missile. They'd put it in a backpack and strap it to some disillusioned fool and march his merry way across the border by car/boat/plane.

In that sense, the missile shield was pretty much nothing but a waste of money that only served to make the Russians irate.

This decision was in the best interests of the US, in my opinion. Thumbs up!

In general I'm for the concept of having a defense against incoming missiles but putting them in eastern Europe had nothing to do with the defense of America. I am sure the decision was made on diplomatic and political grounds so that the administration could pressure Russia, show Poland that we "care", and look tough to the voters back home. I expect lobbyists for the defense contractors were also completely in favor of it.

Where we need anti-missile batteries is stationed in Alaska, Hawaii, and along the west coast. If there is a serious threat from missiles it will be from North Korea and not Russia.

[edit on 17-9-2009 by total_slacker]

Good posts, thank you. Is there anyone who thinks that a missile defense post would be a good idea there?