So much for standing with your allies

[shpirate87]

Poles, Czechs: US missile defense shift a betrayal
By VANESSA GERA, Associated Press Writer Vanessa Gera, Associated Press Writer 2 hrs 52 mins ago

WARSAW, Poland – Poles and Czechs voiced deep concern Friday at President Barack Obama's decision to scrap a Bush-era missile defense shield planned for their countries.

"Betrayal! The U.S. sold us to Russia and stabbed us in the back," the Polish tabloid Fakt declared on its front page.

Polish President Lech Kaczynski said he was concerned that Obama's new strategy leaves Poland in a dangerous "gray zone" between Western Europe and the old Soviet sphere.

In the grand tradition of Obama diplomatic gaffes, the announcement came on the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland.

[ragingclue]

Wow.

Isn't it American tradition to court the impression that we will help, and instead drop the ball, leaving those caught in the middle hanging out to dry? I understand Obama is withdrawing a program that wasn't his because he doesn't agree with it, but he should be aware of any potential fallout that comes with that.

[UncleWede]

See, that's a percentage of the problem we have with our national debt. Yes, I help support poor kids in other countries, but I take care of my own FIRST. Poland has no other allies to put up a hugely expensive shield to protect them from their former enemies? Yes, I know some of the history of the region . . .

"the Polish tabloid Fakt declared on its front page."

[ragingclue]

I'm just concerned with the fact that we pool resources into a project, tell people we're going to do something for them, and then backpedal.

Of course we have more pressing issues at home, which is why I wasn't sure I was for the shield in the first place. But if you're going to do something, don't be half assed.

[shpirate87]

Originally Posted by UncleWede

See, that's a percentage of the problem we have with our national debt. Yes, I help support poor kids in other countries, but I take care of my own FIRST. Poland has no other allies to put up a hugely expensive shield to protect them from their former enemies? Yes, I know some of the history of the region . . .

"the Polish tabloid Fakt declared on its front page."

I do not think you understand the purpose of the missile defense system. It is not meant to protect Poland and the Czech Republic exclusively and would be of no use against Russia given the limited number of interceptor missiles available.

The system is designed to be a layer of defense against against long range missiles from nations like Iran for all of Europe, the north Atlantic, and the east coast of the US.

I think the budget for this system last year was $720 million. That is a rounding era in today's world of $1+ trillion deficits.

[TMNT]

I don't get it, I read articles the other day that said the Polish & Czech were happy that this plan was pulled back because they didn't want to be in the middle of a security issue between the U.S. and Russia

I guess it all depends on who you ask.

[scottwww]

Originally Posted by ragingclue

I understand Obama is withdrawing a program that wasn't his because he doesn't agree with it, but he should be aware of any potential fallout that comes with that.

I haven't read up on this issue, but it brought to mind Jimmy Carter and his means of dealing with issues. I would expect that those who liked Carter policies will like this.

On the other hand, I happened to catch a little bit of the Michael Savage radio show yesterday. He was speculating that withdrawing the missile defense shield plan was in exchange for something. He explained that Israel had a meeting in Moscow the other day. He estimated that the Russians agreed to not take forcible action against Israel when Israel attacks Iran to destroy their nuclear program in exchange for not deploying the missile shield.

I don't buy it, but it is a thought.

For the most part, Obama just cozies up to the commies, so it is no surprise if he just "gives away the farm". I'll bet that Obama will start dismantling more of our nuclear warheads and probably other technologies and policies the U.S. put into place over the years. Obama is an America hater. Remember "Not God bless America. God DAMN America!" That was pounded into his feeble skull all his life.

Having said all of that, I am torn between differing ideas. I have always favored a strong America. However, we have too many entanglements with other nations. Perhaps it all needs to be reexamined. But I do not trust Mr. Obama in the slightest.

[lib]

Originally Posted by shpirate87

In the grand tradition of Obama diplomatic gaffes, the announcement came on the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland.

I doubt he made this decision on a whim. The process leading up to this announcement likely began before Obama & Putin met back in early July. It's unlikely that the date of this announcement was simply a mistake.

He's trying to send a message.

[shpirate87]

Originally Posted by lib

I doubt he made this decision on a whim. The process leading up to this announcement likely began before Obama & Putin met back in early July. It's unlikely that the date of this announcement was simply a mistake.

He's trying to send a message.

From the team that snubbed a British Prime Minister and then gave him DVDs he couldn't even watch, gave the Queen an ipod full of his own speeches, and mispelled 'Reset' on the buttton they gave to the Russians, I am guessing incompetence is more likely. Besides I cannot imagine what message that might be.

[xbook]

Caveman say defense for allies good .... health care for citizens bad ....

[Mighty M]

Maybe Russia is the better ally. Hmm... lets see here rocket scientists... come on brainiacs.

[shpirate87]

Originally Posted by Mighty M

Maybe Russia is the better ally. Hmm... lets see here rocket scientists... come on brainiacs.

Russia as an ally... why didn't I think of that? I know it was things like their invasion of an ally, natural gas extortion of others, and the sale of advanced weapons to Iran that threw me off.

You really are not too bright. What has Russia done in the past 5 years to be an ally, never mind a better one than the Poles or Czechs?

[DaveO]

Michael Savage? Can you invoke the name of anymore of an uneducated fanatic? I can't believe you would actually use Mr. Savage as a source for background information on geopolitics. Wow.

Regarding the missile shield, there are no secret backdoor deals, nothing amazing about it. Its geopolitics 101. If you went through first year of college you should be able to easily see why this decision was made. Obama can't openly say why because the American public has been conditioned over 8 years to believe that somehow this missile shield will protect us. It will take some time to educate people that this is a lie from the very beginning.

Regardless, back to the 101 part. The reason for this decision is simple. Russia has made it very clear that they are in no way shape or form interested in an adversarial relationship with the USA or returning to the cold war. They have made it clear they will not encroach in the least bit on any American spheres of influence and have asked us to respect the same. We violated that agreement with the issues in Kosovo and worse with this entanglement with Georgia. Georgia not only being part of the Russian sphere of influence for a former member of the USSR, that was a red line for them. Russia decided to make it very public and clear. As you may or may not remember, they went to war with Georgia and they demolished anything Georgia possessed via foreign aid. President Bush decided to bluff the Russians and they called it. It was a clear message that was not lost even on President Bush.

Russia was in effect saying "stop arming people that hate us, because then we will have to arm against them and you have another cold war on your hands". How does the missile shield factor into this? The official line is to protect Europe and US from Iranian missiles. This is a bit of a joke, as Iran has no forward military operating ability. They have no ability to deploy outside of their borders. Firing missiles randomly into European countries does not really accomplish anything without the ability to project power. Furthermore, Iran has not fired an offensive salvo against any foreign enemy since somewhere in the 1100AD. What Russia knows, and most everyone outside the mainstream American public, is that the missile shield has the effect of partially neutralizing the Russian missile arsenal.

With the balance suddenly shifted against them, they have a few choices. One is to lay down and say "I give up". Highly unlikely. The other is to attempt to overcome the defensive system by numbers, which means they will have to increase their arsenals. In essence, the deployment of this missile shield is a complete violation of our own agreements with the Russians vis a vis the SALT/START and even SORT agreements. With that framework broken, there is nothing stopping Russia from arming up.

The glory days in the minds of many republicans is of course the cold war era, in my opinion mainly because of President Reagan. But forget not, Reagan's great contribution was victory in the cold war, not the sustenance of it. Noone wins by breaking our agreements and starting an arms race. Don't be fooled, Russia is not a third world country, they will arm up without hesitation if you provoke them. Having Russia as your ALLY is not a bad thing, you have been trained to look at them as your enemy, mostly because of Chuck Norris, etc.. but they are one of the best allies we can have. Especially in the UN Security Council.

Smarten up, stop trying to weaken this countries international clout and strength with this useless nonsense. I'm pleased to know that the State Department is manned by some very smart people, people who actually have an education. People who know that President Reagan blessed this country with something very unique and aren't about to give that up and embroil us in a new cold war.

[shpirate87]

Originally Posted by DaveO

Regarding the missile shield, there are no secret backdoor deals, nothing amazing about it. Its geopolitics 101. If you went through first year of college you should be able to easily see why this decision was made. Obama can't openly say why because the American public has been conditioned over 8 years to believe that somehow this missile shield will protect us. It will take some time to educate people that this is a lie from the very beginning...

Did you get this crap from the same place you "learned" that the 9/11 hijackers did not believe that Islam ordered them to do it?

The missile defense system consisted of TEN (10) interceptors in Poland. It posed absolutely no threat to Russia's missile arsenal which numbers in the hundreds.

As for Iran, what purpose do you believe their missile (and nuclear) program serves? Don't be stupid.

The bottom line is that Russia wants to reassert its influence over its former captive nations and despite our pledges to the people of those nations we are rolling over.

[DaveO]

Originally Posted by shpirate87

Did you get this crap from the same place you "learned" that the 9/11 hijackers did not believe that Islam ordered them to do it?

The missile defense system consisted of TEN (10) interceptors in Poland. It posed absolutely no threat to Russia's missile arsenal which numbers in the hundreds.

As for Iran, what purpose do you believe their missile (and nuclear) program serves? Don't be stupid.

The bottom line is that Russia wants to reassert its influence over its former captive nations and despite our pledges to the people of those nations we are rolling over.

Rhetoric and demagoguery don't work on me. I'm not afraid of Islam, that word doesn't make me suddenly shake in fear. I know its hard for you, but leave that crap at the door.

Show me FACTS or at least a reasoned argument as to what you believe the Iranian, or any country's ballistic missile projects are for. They are for the same purpose as our system is for. DEFENSE. We have by far the most advanced missile systems in the world. How many wars or conflicts can you name in which we used missiles as our means to project power? This is the part where education or an IQ above 90 comes into play. Again, missiles are an adjunct used as part of an offensive force, they are not a primary means to project power. If that was the case, Hamas would rule Israel right now with their 1000s of rockets they have fired into Israel.

Russia is not re-asserting anything. They are just reminding us of the lines we agreed to draw a long time ago. If Russia wanted to re-assert influence they wouldn't be worried about Georgia and would rather be cozying up to Cuba and Venezuela in a big way. Which they are not doing and will not do because that is not their foreign policy. Are you oblivious to the world outside of the USA and terrorism?? Do you have any kind of upper level education what so ever?

Don't get me wrong, the day that a missile defense system is perfected and lives up to the word 'shield' and can reliably destroy any inbound target, I will be the very first to say treaties be damned and put the system up. But as it stands now, an imperfect system that emboldens foreign countries to arm against us is not exactly a smart thing. Thats an understatement.

[shpirate87]

Originally Posted by DaveO

Rhetoric and demagoguery don't work on me. I'm not afraid of Islam, that word doesn't make me suddenly shake in fear. I know its hard for you, but leave that crap at the door.

Show me FACTS or at least a reasoned argument as to what you believe the Iranian, or any country's ballistic missile projects are for. They are for the same purpose as our system is for. DEFENSE. We have by far the most advanced missile systems in the world. How many wars or conflicts can you name in which we used missiles as our means to project power? This is the part where education or an IQ above 90 comes into play. Again, missiles are an adjunct used as part of an offensive force, they are not a primary means to project power. If that was the case, Hamas would rule Israel right now with their 1000s of rockets they have fired into Israel.

Russia is not re-asserting anything. They are just reminding us of the lines we agreed to draw a long time ago. If Russia wanted to re-assert influence they wouldn't be worried about Georgia and would rather be cozying up to Cuba and Venezuela in a big way. Which they are not doing and will not do because that is not their foreign policy. Are you oblivious to the world outside of the USA and terrorism?? Do you have any kind of upper level education what so ever?

Don't get me wrong, the day that a missile defense system is perfected and lives up to the word 'shield' and can reliably destroy any inbound target, I will be the very first to say treaties be damned and put the system up. But as it stands now, an imperfect system that emboldens foreign countries to arm against us is not exactly a smart thing. Thats an understatement.

Whether you are or are not afraid of Islam is irrelevant to the idiocy you posted earlier. The men who planned, financed, and conducted the attacks on 9/11 believed their religion (actually their God) commanded it. Your beliefs in the matter are the crap that needs to be left at the door.

Missiles can serve a power projection function by their very existence. What exactly do you think it was that deterred the Soviet Union from expanding westward during the Cold War? Was it the two corps of ground troops that we had stationed in Europe? Or was it more likely the fact that those troops were backed up by a missile force capable of making any foray into a NATO country potentially suicidal?

Iran's missile and nuclear programs are also designed to act as a deterrent. The difference is what they wish to deter. They want to deter retaliation for their terror sponsorship. They want a free hand in Lebanon for Hezbollah, a free hand in central Asia, as well as a free hand to continue their activities in Iraq. They are the largest state sponsors of terror in the world and they wish to make sure they do not pay a price for it.

Russia IS trying to reassert itself over the area they lost. Any agreement that may have been made in Yalta collapsed when the Wall came down.. The people of the captive states got their freedom and we told them we would help them maintain it. This is just another in a long line of cases where democrats turn their backs on people we made commitments to.

No weapon system is ever perfect. Waiting for one to be so is a back hand way of forgoing the system all together.

[lib]

Originally Posted by DaveO

Show me FACTS or at least a reasoned argument as to what you believe the Iranian, or any country's ballistic missile projects are for.

Well, comments like this definitely don't help.
[u2b]FckLO8HcNyo#t60[/u2b]

[scottwww]

Will Obama stand by what he claimed when he debated Hillary Clinton in the presidential primaries?

"I have been a stalwart friend of Israels. I think they are one of our most important allies in the region, and I think that their security is sacrosanct, and that the United States is in a special relationship with them."

sacrosanct:

• most sacred or holy
• inviolable
• treated as if holy
• immune from criticism or violation
• must be kept sacred
• very sacred, holy, or inviolable
• regarded as sacred and inviolable

Or, is Barack Hussein Obama (aka Barry Soetoro) a man of just words?

[scottwww]

Are things heating up?

link
The clock ticks down: Iranian nuclear nightmare worsens by the second

Editorials

Saturday, September 19th 2009, 4:00 AM

Iran's threat grows ever more dire. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad yesterday again declared the Holocaust to be a fiction and predicted the end of Israel - as his regime worked to produce missiles capable of delivering atomic warheads.

Even the mad-mullah-friendly International Atomic Energy Agency appears to be nervous about Ahmadinejad's intention to go nuclear. And if the IAEA is getting skittish, you can only imagine the justified and rising concern in Israel.

Next up for Ahmadinejad, when he is not brutally repressing dissent in Iran, is a speech at the UN next week and then negotiations with the United States and five other powers about Iran's nuke program. Talk, talk and more talk.

The only sign of action is that President Obama announced a radical change in America's missile defense strategy, canceling planned installations in Poland and the Czech Republic that had irritated Russia.

By the administration's telling, the move, taken at the price of undermining key allies, will pay dividends in greater security against Iran. The U.S. is beefing up ship-based missile defenses against the type of shorter-range missiles Tehran is developing.

Let's put it this way: Obama damn well better be right, because every click of the atomic clock forces Israel toward having to take fight-for-survival measures into its own hands.

That, now, is the terrible balance of fear in the Middle East. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates acknowledged as much when, describing the new missile defense plan, he alluded to a potential strike by Israel.

"We hope that it will reassure them that perhaps there's a little more time here," Gates said.

Tick. Tick. Tick.

[DaveO]

Scottwww, you are really an unashamed fear mongerer. I have a question, in your scenario that 'Israel is forced to attack' Iran, and Iran responds to the attack and a larger scale war breaks out in the Middle East, which of course we will be drawn into, will you blame Israel for attacking or Iran for retaliating.

How about trying to stop such a scenario in the first place? Countries are capable of coming to agreements for peace. Yes its not unheard of, you dont have to bomb everyone that doesn't agree with you. This isn't the united world of america. But what am I saying, psshh.. that peace thing is only for liberal hippies.

How is the IAEA mullah friendly? Just because they don't accept the crazyness that came out of the Bush white house for the last 8 years and rather made their own investigations and assertions? Or maybee because the head of the IAEA has a middle eastern name and so its just racism. I've personally worked with the IAEA on multiple projects (they dont just deal with "nuclear weapons in Iran" as most of the morons here probably believe) and its a highly professional organization with some of the brightest minds from around the world.

Again, where are the facts in all this? Demagoguery needs to be sapped out of the political debate any time in pops up, and right now you are the kingpin of it here on this forum.

[scottwww]

One day the battle will ensue. I would not speed it's coming. The cost will be great in lives and in lost souls. No amount of negotiation and cooperation will stop the eventual outcome.

I would like to see a peaceful solution in the Middle East and around the globe, though how can peace be found with Ahmadinejad?

The U.S. has far too many and overly far-reaching entanglements with foreign powers. It was meant for the U.S. to be at peace with all to the extent that it is possible.

The danger is high in the Middle East and elsewhere. The solutions are much less than perfect whatever is done. We have a president whom I believe made a pledge for Israel which may have been for nothing more than political gain in debate. If his words were not merely words, then where is his action? Perhaps behind the scene he has kept that pledge (as suggested by Michael Savage). On the other hand, he may have no intention of keeping that pledge. I would rather he had not given it.

I do not propose a solution, because I don't see one. I do not discourage the effort to find a solution, because it must be tried. My advice is to prepare for tribulation, and be ready when called. I plan to meet up with Christ before the end comes, and then to return with him.

[scottwww]

Ahmadinejad proud of Holocaust denial

Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said he is proud the West was outraged at his denial the Holocaust was a real event.