Obama 'ready to drop shield plans for Russian help on Iran'

KingBroly

KingBroly

CAGiversary!
I don't know about you all, but I'm not one to trust Mr. Putin for help.

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20090302/120375219.html

MOSCOW, March 2 (RIA Novosti) - Washington has told Moscow that Russian help in resolving Iran's nuclear program would make its missile shield plans for Europe unnecessary, a Russian daily said on Monday, citing White House sources.

U.S. President Barack Obama made the proposal on Iran in a letter to his Russian counterpart, Dmitry Medvedev, Kommersant said, referring to unidentified U.S. officials.

Iran's controversial nuclear program was cited by the U.S. as one of the reasons behind its plans to deploy a missile base in Poland and radar in the Czech Republic. The missile shield has been strongly opposed by Russia, which views it as a threat to its national security. The dispute has strained relations between the former Cold War rivals, already tense over a host of other differences.

The leaders have exchanged letters and had a telephone conversation since Obama was sworn into office in January, Kommersant said. The first high-level Russia-U.S. meeting will take place later this week, when Russia Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov meets with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Geneva.

Moscow has not yet responded to the proposal by Obama, the paper said, adding that a decision was unlikely to be made during Lavrov and Clinton's meeting.

The issue is likely to be discussed when Obama and Medvedev meet in London on April 2 on the sidelines of the G20 summit of world leaders to address the financial crisis. Earlier reports said Medvedev had also invited the U.S. leader to visit Russia and the date of Obama's first visit to the largest country in the world could be announced in the British capital.

In an interview on Sunday with Spanish media, Medvedev said he hoped to discuss the issue of missile defense with Obama in London. He also said he hoped the new U.S. administration would display a "more creative approach" to the issue than its predecessors.

"We have received signals from our American colleagues," Medvedev said. "I expect those signals will turn into specific proposals. I hope to discuss the issue, which is extremely important for Europe, with U.S. President Barack Obama."

The United States and other Western nations suspect Tehran of secretly seeking nuclear weapons. Iran says its nuclear program is purely aimed at generating electricity. However, unlike his predecessor, George W. Bush, Obama has stated a preference for diplomatic efforts to resolve the dispute.

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said on the NBC television channel on Sunday that the Islamic Republic was not close to building a nuclear bomb. "They're not close to a stockpile, they're not close to a weapon at this point, and so there is some time," Gates said.

Gates also said that the while more sanctions should be imposed against Iran, the door should not be closed to diplomacy
Click to expand...
 
If the goal is to give people a false sense of security and reignite the Cold War, the missile shield is the way to go.

There isn't a downside to not spending billions of dollars on something that won't protect us from Iran or South Korea, but does piss off Russia.
 
Missile defense is our ace in the hole, and I think it's a horrible idea to give it up. Sure, everyone hopes that people like Kim Jong Il and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad give up their nuclear weapons, but does anyone really think they will voluntarily? Keep negotiating, but plan and implement defensive measures where necessary.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']Missile defense is our ace in the hole, and I think it's a horrible idea to give it up. Sure, everyone hopes that people like Kim Jong Il and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad give up their nuclear weapons, but does anyone really think they will voluntarily? Keep negotiating, but plan and implement defensive measures where necessary.[/quote]

For South Korea and Iran, you're right.

For Russia and China, Missile Defense reminds them of SDI.

We've marched NATO deeper into the old USSR territory than Hitler. Putin et al don't appreciate it.

Besides, there are better missile defense systems such as a Lunar Solar Power system with the Mazer Death Ray accessory.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']For South Korea and Iran, you're right.

For Russia and China, Missile Defense reminds them of SDI.

We've marched NATO deeper into the old USSR territory than Hitler. Putin et al don't appreciate it.

Besides, there are better missile defense systems such as a Lunar Solar Power system with the Mazer Death Ray accessory.[/QUOTE]

Russia and China can't possibly think 20 or so interceptors in the Czech Republic can stop their thousands of warheads. It just isn't going to happen. That's just a pretense for saying "get out of here, this is our sphere of influence!"

PS I think you mean North Korea.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']Russia and China can't possibly think 20 or so interceptors in the Czech Republic can stop their thousands of warheads. It just isn't going to happen. That's just a pretense for saying "get out of here, this is our sphere of influence!"

PS I think you mean North Korea.[/QUOTE]
They won't get thousands off in their initial response. And we wouldn't need to shoot down all of their initial response missiles to be hugely successful in a nuclear war against them. Any edge in that game is a game changer.
 
[quote name='speedracer']They won't get thousands off in their initial response. And we wouldn't need to shoot down all of their initial response missiles to be hugely successful in a nuclear war against them. Any edge in that game is a game changer.[/QUOTE]

You honestly see a difference in 497 warheads hitting the U.S. instead of 500? It's a ridiculous protest on its face.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']You honestly see a difference in 497 warheads hitting the U.S. instead of 500? It's a ridiculous protest on its face.[/quote]

Didn't you just say that missile defense is our ace in the hole just a few posts ago?

I agree that this has to go. Billions of dollars for a system that sorta works is unacceptable. Then again, it's defense so conservatives are OK with throwing that money away. Say it's health care and they're all "That's too much pork! Damn liberal spending!".
 
[quote name='depascal22']Didn't you just say that missile defense is our ace in the hole just a few posts ago?

I agree that this has to go. Billions of dollars for a system that sorta works is unacceptable. Then again, it's defense so conservatives are OK with throwing that money away. Say it's health care and they're all "That's too much pork! Damn liberal spending!".[/QUOTE]

It's our ace in the hole with regards to terrorists getting control of a nuclear missile, or Iran/North Korea developing one and launching it (they don't have thousands like Russia, for example).

I don't think it's throwing money away to attempt to protect our country against those very real threats. You are right about conservatives, though, they tend to see all defense spending as good defense spending. I think we spend far too much and need to cut back, especially given our budget difficulties.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']It's our ace in the hole with regards to terrorists getting control of a nuclear missile, or Iran/North Korea developing one and launching it (they don't have thousands like Russia, for example).

I don't think it's throwing money away to attempt to protect our country against those very real threats. You are right about conservatives, though, they tend to see all defense spending as good defense spending. I think we spend far too much and need to cut back, especially given our budget difficulties.[/quote]

We could build a 20 terawatt lunar solar power system with a transmitting maser for less than a trillion dollars.

Sure, the human population only needs 10 terawatts to maintain their standard of living. The upside is a permanent energy source until the sun goes out.

What to do with those other 10 terawatts?

Hmmm. 1 terawatt is enough energy to carve 1 Grand Canyon.

Perhaps another Grand Canyon could be carved at 35° 41' N 51° 25' E or 39° 2' N 125° 41' E?

Seriously, that missile shield is pure stone age bullshit.

A moon mounted maser could melt hundreds of ICBMs at the top of their trajectories.

Even if the missiles weren't melted, focused microwave beams tends to mess up electronics.
 
I really don't think terrorists are all that concerned about getting a missile, they could just do it the old fashioned way.
 
Yeah, in fact, using unconventional weapons seems to work better than conventional ones. Lets be honest, if a missile had been headed for the WTC, we probably would have detected it. Hijacking a plane worked much better for what they wanted to do.

We need more protection against unconventional means of destruction. I'm not that worried about missile attacks.
 
I don't trust Putin either, but the missile shield is a gigantic waste of money. So if we can better our relations with Russia and quit pissing away money on the shield then that's fine by me.
 
The post-WWII superpowers started developing missiles with intercontinental range 60+ years ago. Unsurprisingly, after all this time has passed the little bully dictators have also gained this capability. No way it can be kept secret forever.

So the best solution is to not defend against it. Perfect. It's really the right thing to do, and it makes a person feel good inside.
 
[quote name='SpazX']Does missile defense even work? All I remember are tons of failed tests.[/quote]

Dubiously, at best. I fail to see the point of wasting money on it, since it's little to no defense against those who'd actually attack us.
 
Exactly. Mutually assured destruction has worked in deterring state attacks. And terrorists are likely to get inter continental missles that can reach us any time soon. And even if they did the technology isn't there for the missle shields to justify the expense. Not worth wasting billions on a defense system we don't need and that hasn't been shown to be reliable anyway.
 
The current system they're using doesn't even have a good record of successful hits so far as i know. they've working on things like this for years and still can't get it right. By the time they do, missiles won't even be our biggest worry anymore.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']We could build a 20 terawatt lunar solar power system with a transmitting maser for less than a trillion dollars.

Sure, the human population only needs 10 terawatts to maintain their standard of living. The upside is a permanent energy source until the sun goes out.

What to do with those other 10 terawatts?

Hmmm. 1 terawatt is enough energy to carve 1 Grand Canyon.

Perhaps another Grand Canyon could be carved at 35° 41' N 51° 25' E or 39° 2' N 125° 41' E?

Seriously, that missile shield is pure stone age bullshit.

A moon mounted maser could melt hundreds of ICBMs at the top of their trajectories.

Even if the missiles weren't melted, focused microwave beams tends to mess up electronics.[/QUOTE]

If what you say is true we just made a colossal blunder in putting $787 billion into a "stimulus" bill when that could have just about bought us clean renewable energy forever. Do you have any further info on this fantastic project? I'm fairly skeptical but I'd like to hear more.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']If what you say is true we just made a colossal blunder in putting $787 billion into a "stimulus" bill when that could have just about bought us clean renewable energy forever. Do you have any further info on this fantastic project? I'm fairly skeptical but I'd like to hear more.[/quote]

http://www.acm.org/ubiquity/views/v7i28_kumar.html

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/354/1

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/moon_return_020723.html

Granted, sane people never point out that extra microwave energy could be used offensively.

http://www.asi.org/adb/02/09/he3-intro.html

Then again, mining helium 3 on the moon could power the planet for the next ... um ... 10,000 years without generating any significant pollution.

...

If you have a microwave transmitter capable of raining hot sizzling death on unsuspecting enemies, you can also use it for ...

1. Weather manipulation such as heating blizzards into rain or luring hurricanes away from populated shorelines.

2. Pushing solar sailed spacecraft faster than the solar winds across the solar system and powering them without those pesky nuclear reactors.

3. Blasting the hell out near earth objects such as 199AN10.

4. A cool Pink Floyd laser light show without all of the gouging associated with planetariums.
 
I'm with FOC on this one. I've believed that we have far more advanced types of missile defense than simple SAM set ups for a while now. All kinds of beam weapons. Ever hear of HAARP?

haarp1.jpg
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']http://www.acm.org/ubiquity/views/v7i28_kumar.html

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/354/1

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/moon_return_020723.html

Granted, sane people never point out that extra microwave energy could be used offensively.

http://www.asi.org/adb/02/09/he3-intro.html

Then again, mining helium 3 on the moon could power the planet for the next ... um ... 10,000 years without generating any significant pollution.

...

If you have a microwave transmitter capable of raining hot sizzling death on unsuspecting enemies, you can also use it for ...

1. Weather manipulation such as heating blizzards into rain or luring hurricanes away from populated shorelines.

2. Pushing solar sailed spacecraft faster than the solar winds across the solar system and powering them without those pesky nuclear reactors.

3. Blasting the hell out near earth objects such as 199AN10.

4. A cool Pink Floyd laser light show without all of the gouging associated with planetariums.[/QUOTE]

Sounds neat-o. Especially the laser light show part. But seriously, money for this would be much more worthwhile than increasing Congress' budget by 10 percent, obviously. $30 billion a year for 15-20 years is nothing compared to what's being thrown around already.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']I'm with FOC on this one. I've believed that we have far more advanced types of missile defense than simple SAM set ups for a while now. All kinds of beam weapons. Ever hear of HAARP?
[/QUOTE]

Angels don't play that...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top