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.

 

NEWS: Tony Blair 'agrees to host US missiles'

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 16 2004 @ 09:26 PM
link   
British Prime Minister Tony Blair has agreed to host US interceptor missiles on British soil in a secret deal with the United States. The missiles will kept at a base in North Yorkshire at RAF Fylingdales, which would allow the US to destroy incoming missiles and form part of the Son of Star Wars defence system.
 




BBC NEWS

In August the Danish Government signed a deal to allow a radar base in Greenland to be used but the US did not ask to site missiles.

According to the Independent on Sunday, the deal to permit missiles was brokered in Washington last May by senior official from the British Embassy and the US State Department.

It is reported the British agreed the deal in principle, but asked that it be kept under wraps until after the next election.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Related Links
Ministry of Defence
North York Moors National Park
Yorkshire CND

I dont see the big problem with holding host to Bush's Star wars missile programme but "This could have major implications for the defence posture of the UK, our relationship with NATO countries and other allies." now what else can I really say?






[edit on 16/10/2004 by SE7EN]



posted on Oct, 16 2004 @ 10:02 PM
link   
First Australia, and now the UK. I think that this is great news. The anti-ballistic missile shield expands... mwahahaha


It's good to know that we still have friends whom we trust and who still trust us.



posted on Oct, 16 2004 @ 11:10 PM
link   
I'm not expert on the missile side of things but how deadly or accurate are these interceptor missiles that they plan on or already have installed herein the UK. And is there any chance of the US turning on the UK with these. Should we be worried about this?



posted on Oct, 16 2004 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by veritas93
First Australia, and now the UK. I think that this is great news. The anti-ballistic missile shield expands... mwahahaha


It's good to know that we still have friends whom we trust and who still trust us.


Yeah right, Blair should do us all a favor and shove one up his ass and launch himself to the moon.



posted on Oct, 16 2004 @ 11:19 PM
link   
This I found funny intresting amd worrying the main funny part was this
but all the rest before it just goes to show what they are ready for at a moments notice. click on False Alarms at the below link!

1998, the Yorkshire Evening Post described how Fylingdales had detected an object "the size of a battleship flying in a zig-zag pattern at 17,000mph over the North Sea. It then accelerated to 24,000mph and sped off towrds the Atlantic". Apparently two F-16 fighters scrambled to intercept it were unable to do so. In a second incident, 12 UFOs were supposed to have been seen changing shape in mid-flight. UFO watchers believe the objects may have been experimental military craft and anyway it would make sense to double check the system for bugs before calling out the "Men in Black".

The flyingdales site


[edit on 16/10/2004 by SE7EN]



posted on Oct, 16 2004 @ 11:23 PM
link   
THe interceptors are kinetic kill weapons and have no explosive warhead. I don't think they could be used in the fashin you are owrrying about. They can be destroyed and the derbits could do some damage or explode in thier silos, but I assume the base will not be in a population center.

Edit: No doubt that if the US started getting frisky, the SAS would have no problem securing the site.





[edit on 10/16/04 by FredT]



posted on Oct, 17 2004 @ 12:41 AM
link   
I believe that the projectiles are supposed to intercept an ICBM before or as it re-enters the atmoshpere. I'd say that the installation is more for the protection of the UK than for the US (as we have our own installations on both land and sea). I can't imagine why the SAS would want to seize the site. They have no offensive value.

The Russians have claimed that the missile shield is worthless anyway, however that might just be posturing. They claim that the systems may be fooled with dummy missiles and mock launches, but considering that each anti-ballistic missile facility is supposed to contain 100+ of these missiles, it's hard to imagine that anyone could actually slip one by us even if we missed most of the time.



posted on Oct, 17 2004 @ 12:50 AM
link   
No wonder he wanted it kept under wraps until after the election; A lot of the British public weren't too happy about this the last time it was brought up and neither were a lot of MPs. It means that the UK (and the site in Greenland) will be the first on the target list if someone wanted to nuke the US. Most MPs only wanted it to be allowed if the UK was also covered by the system, and as far as I know that's not the case.



posted on Oct, 17 2004 @ 12:59 AM
link   
Appearently, Bush has been trying to dance around the treaty of 1972, which placed a restriction of 2 missile sites per country and no more than 100 missiles per site. This may only be a loophole to protect the east coast of the US, because we already have our maximum of 2 sites (Alaska and California). However, the UK is the US's closest ally (next to Australia) and I find it hard to believe that the facility wouldn't be used to protect them as well.

I think that Bush knows just how much we need the UK and Blair knows just how much the UK needs the US, both militarily and economically.



posted on Oct, 17 2004 @ 03:33 AM
link   
Ok someone correct me if I am completly wrong but what is the point in having a starwars program to locate missiles and distroy them if US cant even stop 2 planes crashing into the twin towers and the pentagon on there own soil. Is'nt it Norads job to protect airways of america.

Someone am sure will correct me.



posted on Oct, 17 2004 @ 06:31 AM
link   
As long as they are not offensive missles I do not have a problem with it. I would have a problem with offensive strikes being made by the US from UK soil.



posted on Oct, 17 2004 @ 06:37 AM
link   
Will they offer protection to the UK? If they do, then fine...


If not, they better be paying a bucket load of rent, otherwise they can feck off.....



posted on Oct, 17 2004 @ 06:46 AM
link   
I seem to remember reading an article a while ago where a group of US scientists claimed the system was ineffective and would not protect the US from a serious attack. It was therefore nothing more than a very expensive showpiece.
As for the system being used to protect the UK, I wouldn't count on it.



posted on Oct, 17 2004 @ 07:36 AM
link   
All it is is Blair puckering up to Bush again.

If someone were to nuke us with ICBM's im pretty sure that more than an odd 'one or two' would be sent our way.

Anyway if this anti missile systen were designed to destroy missiles whilst outside our atmosphere surley putting them in the UK would make sence because if they were over the US the incoming missiles would be well withing the atmosphere at that time.



posted on Oct, 17 2004 @ 11:25 AM
link   
I am not surprised; UK is America's 53rd state, or is America, UK's other state. I will not expand on that comment, let's leave conspiracies out of here for once.



posted on Oct, 17 2004 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by veritas93
Appearently, Bush has been trying to dance around the treaty of 1972, which placed a restriction of 2 missile sites per country and no more than 100 missiles per site.


Its my understanding that we have withdrawn from that treaty so its moot. The SAS comment was in responce to an above poster who wondered if the US could use the missiles agains the UK.

In a nuclear war yes that would be a targeted site. But, It can defend itself, and if its an attack that the sheild cannot absorb. Ie and exchange between the US and Russia, it wont really matter in anycase.

The shield is really limited to rogue attacks. Not to absorm an all out strike. Now once we have solid state lasers orbiting in space, then we can talk about those types of scenarios IMHO



posted on Oct, 17 2004 @ 11:45 AM
link   


I am not surprised; UK is America's 53rd state, or is America, UK's other state. I will not expand on that comment, let's leave conspiracies out of here for once.


Who is the 52nd state? I am right in thinking the US has 51 aren't I?



posted on Oct, 17 2004 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason



I am not surprised; UK is America's 53rd state, or is America, UK's other state. I will not expand on that comment, let's leave conspiracies out of here for once.


Who is the 52nd state? I am right in thinking the US has 51 aren't I?


Yeah I checked, you are right. I also found this news item: www.cnn.com...

Apprarently a public school in US was teaching America had 53 states. Anyway the 52nd state, would be Iraq. The 54th, Afghanistan, and the 55th, Israel. I am sure there are many more.

[edit on 17-10-2004 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Oct, 17 2004 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT

Its my understanding that we have withdrawn from that treaty so its moot.


You're absolutely right, however it appears that Bush is still trying to keep within the restraints. We have yet to break our 2 site maximum, but I'm not sure if we've broken the 100 missile per site cap.



posted on Oct, 17 2004 @ 12:42 PM
link   
Some have claimed that the missile shield would be worthless, yet nations such as Germany, Sweden and China are afraid that it's development may threaten global security. Also, Russia has shown great interest in collaborating with the US and it's allies on this program. Obviously, someone thinks that the shield will be effective.

Personally, I think that drawing Russia into the deal would be a fantastic idea. Australia is the most dedicated to participation in this program, now the UK is onboard, Canada "stopped just short of saying yes", and now Russia wants in on the deal. If enough time and money are put into this missile shield then one day we may all be able to put aside our fears of a missile based nuclear attack EVER happening.
Russia willing to talk...

This link is over three years old. Things may have changed by now, so I'm looking for more recent articles.




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join