It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Obama Revives Rumsfeld’s Missile Scheme, Risks Nuke War

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 02:38 PM

The Obama administration is poised to take up one of the more dangerous and hare-brained schemes of the Rumsfeld-era Pentagon. The New York Times is reporting that the Defense Department is once again looking to equip intercontinental ballistic missiles with conventional warheads. The missiles could then, in theory, destroy fleeing targets a half a world away — a no-notice “bolt from the blue,” striking in a matter of hours. There’s just one teeny-tiny problem: the launches could very well start World War III.

Over and over again, the Bush administration tried to push the idea of these conventional ICBMs. Over and over again, Congress refused to provide the funds for it. The reason was pretty simple: those anti-terror missiles look and fly exactly like the nuclear missiles we’d launch at Russia or China, in the event of Armageddon. “For many minutes during their flight patterns, these missiles might appear to be headed towards targets in these nations,” a congressional study notes. That could have world-changing consequences. “The launch of such a missile,” then-Russian president Vladimir Putin said in a state of the nation address after the announcement of the Bush-era plan, “could provoke a full-scale counterattack using strategic nuclear forces.”

Full Story

I don't know about the rest of the people on here, but this is just absurd. Launching ICBM's with conventional warheads, or anything that could be misinterpreted as a nuclear device shouldn't even be considered.
That's akin to pointing a gun at a cop, then wondering why..if you got shot.

And if anyone still refused to believe in the NWO and TPTB controlling everything, for Obama to have anything in common with Rumsfield and Bush's extremist view of defense this has to be the clincher. Congress has repeatedly refused funds for this, but yet Obama picks it up after it already being a hair-brained scheme from a previous monarchy.

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 02:41 PM
Take one look at this and tell me who the aggressor is...

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 02:45 PM
Obama decided he likes his throne and in kingly fashion will defend his realm with the weapons he has been provided through the toil of his enslaved peasants. It is good to be king...even if you are a souless clone.

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 02:47 PM
This is just one more step, and perhaps the final one, into World War III. When WWIII breaks out it is the beginning of the end.

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 02:49 PM
reply to post by CanadianDream420

Well you can start by taking Poland and Czech. Rep. off that list. Aside from that the apparent interceptor sites are just in Alaska and Cali. Everything else is just radar.

I do have to agree that in the eyes of a threatened nation any ICBM blip on the radar is considered a nuclear threat regardless of the contents of its warhead. I suppose in Obama's case he will just stuff the warheads with propaganda fliers declaring that the target nation has just been Punkd.

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 02:52 PM
Uhmmm... I think I need some more info about this. What is the point again?? To shoot targets on the battlefield by launching a missle from America? I don't understand how that is strategic at all. But besides all that, didn't Obama and Russia JUST sign a nuke deal. Why, on the heels of that, do something that seems to provoke a NUKE ATTACK!!

This doesn't make ANY sense to me??

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 02:58 PM
reply to post by trueperspective

Yep. I totally agree.
And the way I understand this is yes, they are ICBM's that have non nuclear warheads instead of nuclear ones.
Here is more of the same article I posted.

The Pentagon mumbled all kinds of assurances that Beijing or Moscow would never, ever, never misinterpret one kind of ICBM for the other. But the core of their argument essentially came down to this: Trust us, Vlad Putin! That ballistic missile we just launched in your direction isn’t nuclear. We swear!

Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld couldn’t even muster that coherent of a defense.

“Everyone in the world would know that [the missile] was conventional,” he said in a press conference, “after it hit within 30 minutes.”

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 03:17 PM
This is just another Giant Leap Backwards for the Obamanation.
I really think he wants to start WWIII

We have a Kenyan in the tinderbox and he has a pocketful of matches!

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 03:18 PM
So far, Obama's defense strategy is no different from the Bush-Cheney brigade. He throws in a few different words and doesn't sound like a renegade cowboy, but the actual stuff going on is exactly the same.

The office of the president seems to have it's own mind, never mind who the president is. Been this way for longer than I can remember. If Obama = Bush, then elections are just a sham. Not that I didn't think so before, but this just solidifies it.

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 03:24 PM
I am starting to worry about how far the current administration is willing to go to fight these wars. This is a stupid idea and not really needed we can use cruise missiles for Gods sake cant we?

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 03:29 PM
reply to post by Subjective Truth

If we wouldn't do provocative things like this, we might not need to use ANY kind of missile. Or anything else for that matter.

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 03:30 PM
That strategy makes about as much sense as sending a B52 to drop a hand-grenade

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 03:35 PM
Only America would be stupid enough to develop a weapons system that costs $50 million dollars to take out one person. You'd think they could find better ways to spend our money?

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 03:38 PM
Has anyone considered the possibility that it's not so much that Obama came into office planning to have the same foreign policy as Bush, but that key individuals manipulated both Bush and Obama through flow of information?

What if Obama is constantly being told of excessive threats that don't actually exist and we don't hear about him being told because it's "classified" and so in legitimate fear for our country Obama and Bush acted the way they did in foreign policy?

I think we need to look at who the key figures that talked to both bush and obama about foreign policy are and that's where we will find the guy pulling the strings.

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 03:39 PM
reply to post by Violater1

"We have a Kenyan in the tinderbox with a pocketful of matches!"

That was hilarious. I would tend to agree with you though. This is a horrible plan to put in action. Are we trying to provoke an attack?

Heres How I Picture Thursday in the Oval Office: "Obama: Hey lets scare Russia and China plus all of our other enemies with these missiles that could be nuclear. Hey, air force, launch that ship but don't tell anyone anything. Make sure they know its up there, though, doing something secret.
Biden, go make sure we take out life insurance policies on everyone under Obamacare. Maybe we will have enough money from the insurance to get Goldman Sachs out of debt if we can get Putin to nuke Detroit. These people wanted change, and I haven't fulfilled enough campaign promises yet. By god, I'll give them change! We'll kill two birds with one stone here. Actually more like a few million birds, but you get the gist of the metaphor... "
Biden: "This is a big F****** deal Mr. President!"

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 03:40 PM
reply to post by Asktheanimals

Do you hate America?

It seems so!

Those 50 million$/missile CREATE AMERICAN JOBS!

Don't you trust Dear Leader and his economic strategy? Maybe his holyness next step is to wage nuclear war so the economy can recover by all the infrastructure building that will be needed in America!

[edit on 23-4-2010 by Vitchilo]

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 03:44 PM
[edit on 23-4-2010 by LadySkadi]

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 03:47 PM
this could also be posturing on our part because of:

I mean it would seem like this kind of missile would be perfect for, well, the mistrals.

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 05:37 PM

Originally posted by CanadianDream420
Take one look at this and tell me who the aggressor is...

And the implication is? What does the picture say about the arsenals and capabilities of all the others?

top topics


log in