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.

 

Missile Defence:Poland,Czech Rep. in negotiations with US over interceptor sites

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 13 2004 @ 06:08 PM
link   
News broke out today that Poland and the Czech Republic are negotiating with the US government in regards to placing BOTH radar warning systems and anti-ballistic missile interceptors in Eastern Europe. Poland's hilly southern region is being considered, specifically, as an ideal spot to house a squadron of anti-missile interceptors in underground silos.

The sites would be paid for by the US:
www.guardian.co.uk...

Though said to be intended for use against Syrian or Iranian missiles (to prevent the nuclear blackmail of Europe)... such a deployment will obviously entail some defence against Russia. In fact, as the article states, Poland wants to clear the idea with Russia, first, so as not to provoke a diplomatic riff.

Meanwhile, in the US...

Deployment of ten missiles bearing interceptors has already been stepped up in the US:
www.washingtonpost.com...

[edit on 13-7-2004 by onlyinmydreams]

[edit on 13-7-2004 by onlyinmydreams]




posted on Jul, 13 2004 @ 09:17 PM
link   
Excellent! The US has spent alot of time cutlivating allies in the former warsaw pact countries. This really underscores the move towards basing our forces in these countries. The economies of Germany etc will have to absorb the loss of our bases.

No doubt that if they are going base interceptors there, I can't imagine not allowing more bases etc. This underscores the principle that the missile shield is to protect aginst rogue nations and will also help to extend that shield to Europe. These countries have not forgot the US contribution to winning the cold war (Sorry my nationalism got the best of me)



posted on Jul, 13 2004 @ 11:25 PM
link   
Why should we have to pay for something on thier own territory!



posted on Jul, 13 2004 @ 11:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Murcielago
Why should we have to pay for something on thier own territory!


uhh.. because it's ours*?

-koji K.

*using "ours" to mean american.

[edit on 13-7-2004 by koji_K]



posted on Jul, 14 2004 @ 01:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Murcielago
Why should we have to pay for something on thier own territory!


Because it benifits both us and them. We get forward deployed protection for ourselves in return for protecting the country we put them in. In this situation, everyone wins (except Russian nationalists).



posted on Jul, 14 2004 @ 12:18 PM
link   
I say we let the Russians have the missile system for free and let them set them up where ever they want. That way they will know we have no ill will towards them, and our NATO-Russia missile defense shield will be even more powerful. Then states like North Korea and Iran won't seem so threatening......



posted on Jul, 14 2004 @ 01:32 PM
link   
There is too muchclassified and sensitive material to just give to the Russians, not to mention it would degrade our national defense. Think about it, if they had the system, they could then sell it to whomever they wanted, such as China, NK, anyone in the middle east ect ect ect.

You have much too optimistic a view of Russia. Are they the enemy/threat they were 15 years ago? No. Do they represent the greatet millitary threat to the US? Absolutely. You don't just give soething like this to your biggest rival.



posted on Jul, 14 2004 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pyros
I say we let the Russians have the missile system for free and let them set them up where ever they want. That way they will know we have no ill will towards them, and our NATO-Russia missile defense shield will be even more powerful. Then states like North Korea and Iran won't seem so threatening......


Technolgy transfer would be brutal from the kill vehicles to the X-band radar. The Russian government out of neccesity is selling off its technology for hard currency. I would not want that tech to get out.....



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join