[Hawkeye_a]

This news just came to light a few days ago.

Reference:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/19/wo...ml?_r=1&hp

This is probably one of the best decisions to come from the Obama Administration yet (although the ramifications have yet to be seen).

Why a good decision ? well imo...
-Russia has posed a much smaller threat in the recent decade
-The purpose of such a system would protect eastern Europe, which have very little strategic value to the U.S. now that we have moved on from the cold war.
-Frees up resources (capital, manpower, diplomatic) etc
-Brings Russia closer diplomatically.... a favor would be expected (hint: on Iran)
-Focus of such technology where it's needed. To protect American oil interests in the Persian gulf and Israel from countries which have been testing ballistic technologies and enriching Uranium(Iran).
-Iran. it seems like with the Iranians beating about the bush on the nuclear issue, a new round of sanctions is almost an inevitability at this point. A missile defense system would be a great failsafe, if Iran decided to "break out" or reacts 'unfavorably'.


For the most part, the Obama administration has been 'dormant' on the world stage imo. there was a lot of high level 'talk' and nothing happening. This move has definitely swayed my opinion in favor of the new administration. Point being..... they seem focused on the new issues on the world stage, and are going about it very strategically.

Discuss.

[King Bob On The Cob]

I fear that Russia may start annexing countries that are important to our oil interests (Georgia) to capture the oil pipeline, and have the ability to apply an economic stranglehold on the west.

[OreoCookie]

Well, nobody will do anything about that, NATO will not start a war over Georgia, for instance, with or without missile defense.

[turtle777]

Yes, excellent decision.

Obama pissed of countless allies (Poland, Czech etc.), in order to cudle up with questionable countries like Russia.

It teaches the world a few important lessons:

1) Never f***ing trust the US to keep their word
2) The US will use any ally just to get what the US wants
3) "Allies" need to develop their own weapons and nuclear bombs. A new arms race, for sure.

Awesome. Thanks, Obama.

-t

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Yes, excellent decision.

Obama pissed of countless allies (Poland, Czech etc.), in order to cudle up with questionable countries like Russia.

It teaches the world a few important lessons:

1) Never f***ing trust the US to keep their word
2) The US will use any ally just to get what the US wants
3) "Allies" need to develop their own weapons and nuclear bombs. A new arms race, for sure.

Awesome. Thanks, Obama.

-t

Worse, he makes this move on the 70th Anniversary of the Soviet invasion. Poland won't even pick up Hillary's call. Nice touch Obama.

[OreoCookie]

The mistake was to push this technically unfeasible project in the first place and not to move out of it. It has been sold as a project against Iran and it doesn't do anything to protect from Iranian missiles.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

The mistake was to push this technically unfeasible project in the first place and not to move out of it. It has been sold as a project against Iran and it doesn't do anything to protect from Iranian missiles.

Still, it's a horrible way of turning against your partners.

Poland and Czech Republic risked a lot by going with the US, and against Russia.
The US lost a lot of credibility through this.

-t

[Hawkeye_a]

Hmmm didnt think of the situation from that angle... im kinda struggling here, so maybe someone can help me out:
-What did Poland or the Czechs ever do for the U.S. ? Last i remember they were at most allies in the cold war (ie they wanted our 'protection', allowed us to build military installations, etc) Now the cold war with the soviets is over.
-It seems that our 'allies' in the Persian Gulf have more to offer (ie oil), so protecting them against the 'new soviets'(Iran/Hez/etc) has more value (ie greater ROI) as opposed to a conflict which in essence ended 20-odd years ago.

The U.S. (and any other entity) needs to change strategy, evolve, and make the best decisions possible in the time and place for itself. it might have made sense to suggest such a plan 20 years ago when the soviets were still around..... but now, even if we did follow through with it... whats the 'benefit'/whats the payoff ? was anyone actually expecting Russia to move into Poland/Czech republic in the near future ? Compare the Russia of today with the U.S.&Europe.

-How about Iran ? which has been threatening neighbors and Israel ? Ultimately threatening the world's oil supply ?
-I'm actually glad Obama prioritized the way he did. cause containing Iran, assuring Israel and maintaining the steady supply of oil is worth a lot more(by any account) than the approval of Poles and Czechs imo, or with following through with a 20 year old 'promise' that has a much diminished value to any party today. i highly doubt Russia will try to invade Poland or the Czech republic .... primarily because the U.S. and the E.U wont stand for it.(i think)

To the Poles/Czechs: get with the program. start diplomacy/strengthen your own defenses if you want. don't rely so much on someone else. Use your own (EU's) resources. Don't expect the U.S.(or anyone else for that matter) to aide you indefinitely , especially when the roles of most of the 'actors' have changed so much. (The EU, fall of the Soviets, NATO, Iran, The Arab states, Afghanistan, etc)

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Obama pissed of countless allies (Poland, Czech etc.), in order to cudle up with questionable countries like Russia.

Don't worry about it. If Barry goes dancing with Putin he'll quickly find out who's wearing the trousers. Get the popcorn ready.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Still, it's a horrible way of turning against your partners.

Poland and Czech Republic risked a lot by going with the US, and against Russia.
The US lost a lot of credibility through this.

No, the US has lost credibility by promising something they couldn't technically deliver. Besides, the large majority of the Czech people actually opposes (rather: opposed) the stationing of the missile defense shield in their country.

It's clear that the populist Kaczynski twins see this as a major defeat -- because it is. I don't worry so much what the Kaczynski twins are saying, they ticked off everyone in Europe a few times with their amateurish and sometimes even childish behavior.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

-What did Poland or the Czechs ever do for the U.S. ? Last i remember they were at most allies in the cold war (ie they wanted our 'protection', allowed us to build military installations, etc) Now the cold war with the soviets is over.

Politics is almost never ever about benevolence. It's in the US' own interests to keep strategic basis in relevant parts of the world. Rammstein in Germany, for instance, is used to support troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. Their military hospital treats a lot of the wounded. It's not a favor to Germany that America has a basis there, but something very useful to have.

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

-It seems that our 'allies' in the Persian Gulf have more to offer (ie oil), so protecting them against the 'new soviets'(Iran/Hez/etc) has more value (ie greater ROI) as opposed to a conflict which in essence ended 20-odd years ago.

The security architecture of Poland and Czech republic first and foremost involves the European Union and NATO. Poland ≠ Georgia: if Russia invades one of the EU member states, war will not be avoidable.

Poland is often mistrusting of both, Russia and the West (they have been partitioned by Nazi Germany and the Soviets, invaded by both and the Soviets stayed for decades).

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

The U.S. (and any other entity) needs to change strategy, evolve, and make the best decisions possible in the time and place for itself.

That's correct, and you see a lot of changes already, microscopic as well as macroscopic. Cold War projects (such as the F22 and other Missile Defense Shield) are cut down in favor of more modern projects (e. g. drones or initiatives to develop smaller, more maneuverable tanks that are more useful in urban warfare).

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

-How about Iran ? which has been threatening neighbors and Israel ? Ultimately threatening the world's oil supply ?

Iran is very concretely addressed with Obama's decision. On the same time, he puts pressure on Israel not to act unilaterally without coordinating actions with the world and the US in particular.

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

To the Poles/Czechs: get with the program. start diplomacy/strengthen your own defenses if you want. don't rely so much on someone else. Use your own (EU's) resources.

The US has promised other help (perhaps weapon systems such as Patriot missiles) to these countries.

[Wiskedjak]

How does one defend against and antimissle?

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

The US lost a lot of credibility through this.

Even more importantly, the US doesn't have much credibility to lose these days.

[ebuddy]

What promise did we get from Russia in exchange for scrapping the missile defense program?

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

What promise did we get from Russia in exchange for scrapping the missile defense program?

Let me guess: nada, zilch, nix, nothing.
At the most, we got empty promises. As always.

The world is laughing at the self-imposed weakness of the US these days.

-t

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Let me guess: nada, zilch, nix, nothing.
At the most, we got empty promises. As always.

Seeing as how the Russians have been instrumental in facilitating Iran's nuclear proliferation, I can't possibly imagine what they'll be doing for us in regards to Iran.

The world is laughing at the self-imposed weakness of the US these days.

I fear you are correct sir.

"Comrade Obama! Fidel, careful or we are going to end up to his right!" ~Chavez

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

What promise did we get from Russia in exchange for scrapping the missile defense program?

The missile defense program's (official) purpose was to defend against Iranian long-range missiles. Since they don't have that capability at the moment, resources are re-allocated to defend against medium- and short-range missiles -- those that can actually hit Israel or other allies.

Russia is no immediate military problem (the Russians rather bargain with gas and oil these days than rattling with their sabers) while Iran's activities are. If we are pretending we're still in the midst of the Cold War, we will miss the actual problems at hand.

Originally Posted by turtle777 

The world is laughing at the self-imposed weakness of the US these days.

Actually, it's the opposite: in general, other countries respect that the US is reversing stupid decisions. Insisting on continuing going down the wrong path is weakness, not reversing it. Insisting on something with little to no international support is weakness, not seeking collaboration with others.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

Insisting on something with little to no international support is weakness, not seeking collaboration with others.

This makes no sense. Huddling in a gang and doing the wrong thing is far weaker than going it alone and doing the right thing.