Obama scraps Bush's European missile defense plan

[Wedgebuster]

STAR WARS DEFENSE SYSTEM!!!!!!

OMFG!!!!!

Luke Starfucker, video gaming the life out of the commie scum!!! Horrify the Rueshins to their nees!! Nuklar threat aborted!! Ronnie Rayguns is re-incarnated!!! George W. Bush's forcefield over the free world protecting those hoo loves themselves some freedom, and again them that hate us for our freedom!!!


Ok, lost it in the last sentence...

Fucking lemmings.



Stuuuuupid motherfuckers.

Jesus will save us, fuck the missiles, just ask catmountakeitupthebuttman.

[Chizzang]

Dear Conk Cocksuckers,
This is the CHANGE I voted for!

Bump...

[native]

Of course the Poles and Czechs recall being occupied by the Soviets. They supported the missile shield and other aspects of U.S. policy despite being screwed by FDR in 1943, because it was in their interest to do so.

Why do you think they supported the missile shield so strongly - because they were worried about Tehran?

Why is it in our interest to abandom them? Why is Russian appeasement in our interest? Why should the Russians feel threatened by a purely defensive system?

If the reason behind the missile shield is to counter Tehran as President Bush stated time and again, then why are we debating it from the standpoint that abandoning it is tantamount to leaving our allies at the mercy of Russia? The fact is that the missile shield does not happen without Russian support or at least aquiescence. Bush knew it, and Obama knows it. This is why both Presidents went to great lengths to try to convince the Russians that the missiles were not meant to be a part of a militarized wall to their west. I am as pugilistic about Russia as any hawk, but the system's benefits do not counteract the ill will with Russia. Especially when again, we are renegotiating START this December. The benefits to Europe of a renewed treaty will be much greater than a missile shield ostensibly meant to counter Iranian missiles that will likely never be aimed at Europe.

To specifically answer your questions, we are not abandoning our allies in Eastern Europe. There will be other concessions to them.

Appeasement is not the applicable term because Russia is not a belligerent and is not threatening POL or CZ (at least not militarily...economically is another story, but you don't counter that with missiles). We are not offering to move the system in return for Russian non-aggression.

The system, no matter what we call it, is not purely defensive. A missile that can shoot down rising ballistic missiles can also clear the skies of enemy aircraft. If the Russians were putting a similar system in Cuba, rest assured that we would have the same reservations.

And we wouldn't be looking to Poland or CZ to protect us.

Points taken. I appreciate your well considered and detailed posts, CID!

[CitadelGrad]

We don;t need to "insert" ourselves in there... Team America World Police needs to quietly fade into the distance as a policy - as ancient history - as an example of how we "used to behave"

Do you mean how we behaved in the 20s and 30s? That behavior did a real spiffy job of preventing WWII and the deaths of 50 million, didn't it?

[Appaholic]

We don;t need to "insert" ourselves in there... Team America World Police needs to quietly fade into the distance as a policy - as ancient history - as an example of how we "used to behave"

Do you mean how we behaved in the 20s and 30s? That behavior did a real spiffy job of preventing WWII and the deaths of 50 million, didn't it?

Yeah...not to mention pulling our cajones out of the financial fire & eliminating the need to worry about how to feed the offspring of those 50mil...until 2008 at least....

[native]

Dear Conk Cocksuckers,
This is the CHANGE I voted for!

Bump...

Seaman Recruit, your opinions don't matter. Go back to fishing, where you are more important.

[Chizzang]

We don;t need to "insert" ourselves in there... Team America World Police needs to quietly fade into the distance as a policy - as ancient history - as an example of how we "used to behave"

Do you mean how we behaved in the 20s and 30s? That behavior did a real spiffy job of preventing WWII and the deaths of 50 million, didn't it?

So you anticipate in the world today (as it stands) that if we have Europe take care of it's own business circumstances such as WWII will start all over again...?

or is it just - that's all you've got..?

I'm curious and tickled

[CitadelGrad]

Do you mean how we behaved in the 20s and 30s? That behavior did a real spiffy job of preventing WWII and the deaths of 50 million, didn't it?

So you anticipate in the world today (as it stands) that if we have Europe take care of it's own business circumstances such as WWII will start all over again...?

or is it just - that's all you've got..?

I'm curious and tickled

You might remember from your History class at Harvard (or 5th grade) that WWII not limited to Europe, hence World War II. The United States has vital national interests all over the globe and those interests must be defended. Even a libertarian like me has to understand and admit that. The isolationist policies of pre-WWII America are even more dangerous now that they were between the world wars.

[D1B]

So you anticipate in the world today (as it stands) that if we have Europe take care of it's own business circumstances such as WWII will start all over again...?

or is it just - that's all you've got..?

I'm curious and tickled

You might remember from your History class at Harvard (or 5th grade) that WWII not limited to Europe, hence World War II. The United States has vital national interests all over the globe and those interests must be defended. Even a libertarian like me has to understand and admit that. The isolationist policies of pre-WWII America are even more dangerous now that they were between the world wars.

Libertarian = What embarrassed conservative republicans now call themselves

[CitadelGrad]

You might remember from your History class at Harvard (or 5th grade) that WWII not limited to Europe, hence World War II. The United States has vital national interests all over the globe and those interests must be defended. Even a libertarian like me has to understand and admit that. The isolationist policies of pre-WWII America are even more dangerous now that they were between the world wars.

Libertarian = What embarrassed conservative republicans now call themselves

I voted for Reagan twice, but I've been a Libertarian since the early 90s and probably a libertarian even before then.

[Chizzang]

So you anticipate in the world today (as it stands) that if we have Europe take care of it's own business circumstances such as WWII will start all over again...?

or is it just - that's all you've got..?

I'm curious and tickled

You might remember from your History class at Harvard (or 5th grade) that WWII not limited to Europe, hence World War II. The United States has vital national interests all over the globe and those interests must be defended. Even a libertarian like me has to understand and admit that. The isolationist policies of pre-WWII America are even more dangerous now that they were between the world wars.

How exactly is "not building a weapons system" for central Europe "isolationist" in light of that last 50 years... that is one ENORMOUS stretch my friend

[CID1990]

You might remember from your History class at Harvard (or 5th grade) that WWII not limited to Europe, hence World War II. The United States has vital national interests all over the globe and those interests must be defended. Even a libertarian like me has to understand and admit that. The isolationist policies of pre-WWII America are even more dangerous now that they were between the world wars.

Libertarian = What embarrassed conservative republicans now call themselves

If you are libertarian, and the Republican Party closely represents your views, then you vote Republican. The GOP did represent my views up to and through the presidency of George HW Bush. Since that time I have voted Libertarian in every election, including Bush-Clinton.

The GOP is where many Libertarians have traditionally cast their votes, but lately the GOP has become as bad as the Democrats. As a result, the GOP lost a portion of the libertarian vote this time around. No embarrassment, we just tend to vote our consciences instead of along party lines like the rest of the lemmings in the GOP or the Democratic Party.

[CitadelGrad]

You might remember from your History class at Harvard (or 5th grade) that WWII not limited to Europe, hence World War II. The United States has vital national interests all over the globe and those interests must be defended. Even a libertarian like me has to understand and admit that. The isolationist policies of pre-WWII America are even more dangerous now that they were between the world wars.

How exactly is "not building a weapons system" for central Europe "isolationist" in light of that last 50 years... that is one ENORMOUS stretch my friend

The scrapped system was to serve multiple purposes, political and military. It was also meant to be only the beginning of a much larger system involving many countries. Once fully implemented, the ballistic missile threat to any part of the West from rogue nations like Iran and North Korea would have been virtually eliminated.