Russian Invasion Emboldens Missile Defense Backers

AP ^ | Saturday, August 23, 2008

[Joiseydude]

WASHINGTON — U.S. outrage over Russia's invasion of Georgia could prompt Congress to speed up plans for a missile defense system in eastern Europe.

As missile defense proponents push congressional Democrats to drop funding restrictions, however, they appear to be bolstering an argument made repeatedly by Moscow and rejected by Washington: that the true target of the system is Russia.

But Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Calif., one of the authors of the restrictions, said Democrats will not bend on testing.

"The events in Georgia have nothing to do with the interceptors the U.S. is considering deploying in Poland, and Congress believes that this system is untested and fails to defend against current and emerging threats," she said in a written response to questions from The Associated Press.

"Congress will not be funding an untested system, period," Tauscher said.

[EagleUSA]

Possibly Ivan thought that his oppressive, excessive response to Georgia would somehow scare the West. It may have scared the liberals, RINOs and socialist Euros, but not the real Americans in our government. More than ever, Ivan has given us a reason to build the defense system.

IMHO, Putin really blew it. He clearly showed his hand to the world which put the “pro-Ruskie” panderers on notice and in a position they cannot defend. Maybe this is a blessing in disguise?

[HardStarboard]

>>>"Congress will not be funding an untested system, period," Tauscher said. <<<

I guess Ellen Tauscher would not have funded the deveelopment of the atomic bomb....which probably saved 250,000 American military lives and 1,000,000 Japanese lives by avoiding the need to invade Japan.

What will be saved by defensive missiles that prevent WWIV?

[Mr. Mojo]

But Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Calif., one of the authors of the restrictions, said Democrats will not bend on testing. "Congress will not be funding an untested system, period," Tauscher said.

Tauscher is lying, of course. The system has been tested extensively, and has passed the tests. Tauscher and her fellow Donkeys simply despise the idea of the U.S. having a decisive strategic advatage. They reflexively oppose anything that strengthens/protects our country.

[Flavius]

Oh ok to get this straight, missile interceptors are put in former soviet satellites in order to prevent Iranians lobbying an missile.

The Russians say no way its aimed against us, so they go ballistic on a natural gas pipeline bypass. Now Maginot line proponents of the missiles systems are saying yeah it really is for the Russians.

[BIV]

The atomic bomb probably saved my father’s life. He was in the second invasion force, which had a slightly lower fatality prediction than the first.
Anyway, I thought the missile defense worked pretty well with our shoot down of the errant satellite several months ago. What am I missing, Madame Tauscher?

[microgood]

If missle defense systems are not targeted to the Russians, why would there be a push for them because of what Russia does. Any change to missle defense policy should be baseed on what North Korea or Iran does, not Russia.

[IrishCatholic]

No, you didn’t get it straight.
The missile systems are for the Iranians.
Getting them in former Soviet satellite countries binds them to the West and gives us and them a reason to ensure they are not swallowed up again by Russia.
Hope that clears it up.

[IrishCatholic]

These former Soviet Satellites aren't worried about Russian missiles when the Russians can drive their tanks there.

They want something there the West will feel invested in so they can unite against potential Russian aggression.
Think the Georgians give a crap about missiles? The Ukrainians?
They want to throw their lot with us.
The Russians have thousands of missiles. The few interceptors there wouldn't stop squat. We know that. They know that. What pisses them off is their former slaves aren't terrified and bowing down, they are terrified and joining the West.

[ETL]

Obama Pledges Cuts in Missile Defense, Space, and Nuclear Weapons Programs

February 29, 2008 :: News
MissileThreat.com

A video has surfaced of Presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama talking on his plans for strategic issues such as nuclear weapons and missile defense.

key excerpts...

I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems.

I will not weaponize space.

I will slow our development of future combat systems.

Article: Obama Pledges Cuts in Missile Defense, Space, and Nuclear Weapons Programs:
http://missilethreat.com/archives/id.7086/detail.asp

_________________________________________________________

Note: MissileThreat.com uses the *original* youtube video from the Obama camp itself. It's titled "Obama-Caucus4Priorities":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7o84PE871BE

Another, much more widely viewed and passed along video, is this poor quality copy titled "IN 52 SECS WHY BARACK OBAMA WON'T WIN THE GENERAL ELECTION":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dl32Y7wDVDs

_________________________________________________________

Obama Promises to Dismantle Our Armed Forces
by Robert Maginnis
Posted 04/10/2008 ET

(Mr. Maginnis is a retired Army lieutenant colonel, a national security and foreign affairs analyst for radio and television and a senior strategist with the U.S. Army)

YouTube has an undated 52-second clip of Democratic presidential candidate Senator Barrack Obama outlining his plans for America’s national defense. Obama’s presentation demonstrates either total naivete about important national security programs or he is just pandering for votes among the extreme left.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?print=yes&id=25942

[Flavius]

seems the swallowing up is going swimmingly

[Chode]

if i remember my world geography, a missile flight from Iran to Europe goes that way, but to hit the US the Russians will fly over the North Pole NOT Poland...

[gaijin]

[IrishCatholic]

It will be interesting to see what happens when The McFaul and Dallas enter the arena.

[elmer fudd]

I think you’re wrong on this one. Our anti-missile systems might be useless against the Russians now, but give them 20 years and they won’t be. It wasn’t much more than 20 years ago that Reagan was only first proposing SDI. The Russkies didn’t like it then either. They understood that if we could put a man on the moon, that we could figure out how to shoot down missiles and they know now that our anti-missile system might be small and ineffective, but it won’t stay that way.

[IrishCatholic]

Yes, but once again they don't really care when their tanks can roll right over the missile sites with hardly a care and we can't stop them.
These aren't ballistic missiles, they are anti-missile missiles. They know that.
This is much more about the loss of influence and the neutering of their power over former subordinates.