|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
Military.com Forums Sound Off! Peter Brookes Discussion Area Bullying Barack on MIssile Defense|
Go
|
New
|
Find
|
Notify
|
Tools
|
Reply
|
|
|
New Member |
RE: http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,179457,00.html
On the contrary; Prez-elect Obama is in good position to enforce his own policies. He is not bound by plans made by the Bush Administration. If the EU is engaging Russia, why should we put money and troops on the line to defend the EU from attack? How many MRAPs can we buy with the money diverted from missile defense? |
||
|
|
Member |
Ballistic missile defense for anything outside of the main battlefield is a waste of money and resources, because it is incredibly expensive and does nothing to stop cruise missiles, or for that matter, a tramp steamer chugging into the Port of Los Angeles and lighting off a nuke. Unless you are into welfare for the military industrial complex (which is what the so-called "Heritage Foundation" is all about), this system is too easy to fool and/or provide/create countermeasures for (the countermeasures cost a small fraction of the land-based BMD system). Note also the foreign policy problems created by this hapless president who has been foolish enough to listen to these blathering neo-cons. Russia has every reason to be concerned by continuous encroachment on their borders, just as we are for example, about Venezuela (which is a lot further away than Poland). We have shown them little respect, and now (partially) due to the recommendations of the "Heritage Foundation" our armed forces are the weakest they have been since Viet Nam. Thier recommendations in fact have been so bad, that it makes you wonder who's side they are on (it certainly isn't that of the United States - but I digress). While it is impressive that a few of the tests of the BMD system have been successful (albeit the tests were mostly rigged to succeed), the costs of developing the system vs. the vastly cheaper ways to develop countermeasures make it mostly a fools errand. The Navy, has been quite successful with its program, and should be kept going. But no one (not even Iran, who has been empowered and emboldened by the stupidity of the policies recommended by this so-called "Heritage Foundation") will launch a ballistic missile because it is simply too easy to detect where it came from. And then the retaliation would be massive (especially if Iran launched at Isreal: the Iranians may be a lot of things, but stupid isn't usually one of them). BMD is largely a waste of time, money, and resources. There are other places that money could be spent that would make us far more secure. And stopping donations and/or funding to the so-called "Heritage Foundation" and redirecting those wasted funds to one of the charities supporting our homecoming armed forces personnel would be far more useful, while really "supporting the troops", and enhancing our national security. |
|||
|
New Member |
Do you have a bio? |
|||
|
|
New Member |
I spent the past few years on the operational side of MD. Aegis is a top notch system, THAAD is almost there, PAC3 is batting a pretty high average. I love MD, it's a great system and a great bunch of people who run, manage and maintain it.
Now let's get to the GBI's (Ground Based Interceptor's that are stationed at VAFB and Ft. Greeley AK). These are the systems that Pres. Bush wants in Europe. Pres-elect Obama has already said he likes the idea of MD, he is against putting it in Europe because it is not a proven system. He is 100% correct. The GBI's aren't very good, they are totally unproven! Out of 10 tests since I left, only 2 were good, 1 of those was an accident! So, let's do the math and let's give that 1 lucky shot to "good" shot side. This is only a 20% successful shot rating! Why would we even think about starting another possible Cold War with Russia with odds like that? For those of you that don't agree. Would you buy a brand new model car, a first year production if out of 2 years of development, they only successfuly got good test for less than a month then mass produced it? I bet you wouldn't! Another way of looking at this, if the Military wants a good vehicle, would they just do a little testing then mass produce it? The fact is they wouldn't! MD is a GREAT system, but it's a FAR way off from perfect. Although no system is perfect let's atleast get close. The GBI's aren't even close. I don't even want to get into the radar they want to use! |
|||
|
|
New Member |
And yes, I meant not to log in! Spent 2 1/2 years in MD operations with communications. Met quite a few Senators among others. |
|||
|
* |
Obama will find himself in exactly the same spot Kennedy was in back in 1960. Being a Democrat, if he cozies up to the Russians and Chinese, he'll be seen as being soft - a leftist socialist puppet. So he'll have to act tough, the same as Kennedy did; except Obama doesn't even have a sliver of credibility of toughness. At least Kennedy had a boat blown out from under him and survived to show he had at least some courage. So the Ruskies and the Chicoms will have to come at him somehow to see what he's made of, but it will probably be through their surrogates: North Korea, Venezuela, or Iran, just like Khrushchev used Castro and Ho Chi Minh. Maybe the Ruskies will make a move in eastern Europe - Poland maybe. Then Obama will have his hands full - -
It will be interesting to see - if we survive it - - Wandering and Wondering |
|||
|
Member |
The correct headline should be: "Idiotic Corporate Welfare Program Meets its Demise--It Still Doesn't Work."
This comedy Ghostwriter is such a Missile Defense Shield shill, seemingly everything issued under this banner is about Missile Defense and how scary the Russkies, NKoreans, or worse, "The Known Unknowns--we know who and what they are--we think." The sheer rejection of the premise of this Ghostwriter was made clear on election day. Still the corporate propaganda remains humorous: "Missile defense gives policy makers choices beyond massive retaliation - and is one of our few reasonable options to protect ourselves and our interests against the growing threat of missiles and weapons of mass destruction..." Psssst, the election is over, scary talk--no workee and MD no workee. It's going to be a looooooong 4 years, you betcha   This message has been edited. Last edited by: rockriver04, |
|||
|
|
New Member |
To Basic Training
You state "The GBI's aren't very good, they are totally unproven! Out of 10 tests since I left, only 2 were good, 1 of those was an accident! So, let's do the math and let's give that 1 lucky shot to "good" shot side. This is only a 20% successful shot rating! Why would we even think about starting another possible Cold War with Russia with odds like that?" You bet if it was coming down on me and you would too. What would you do, throw rocks at the missle, you would do anying thing at any odds to protect your family? I would take a long shot over no shot. A 20% percent chance at a rifle shot is very good in combat. |
|||
|
|
"Has Been 5" Lead Moderator Sound Off Forums  |
Points well taken. I was serving in Cuban waters in those days of April '61 and it was tough duty. So much spook action going on and the citizens at home and even the White House were unaware of what really was going down. Then 18 months later at one point, this nation within seconds of a nuclear exchange in Cuban waters. JFK's nerves of steel in October '62 held out over Nikita and Fidel. Whew! We survived that time. Now we have another nut in Venezuela, named Hugo Chavez who may agitate situations with the Russians, who invited their Navy to visit his waters. I will cast no stones. Another proud member, Derelict Veterans Group. “OF MUNERIS UT TOTUS”  |
|||
|
Member |
Mr. Brookes is part of the "triumvirate" of advocates on this op-ed forum along with North and Gaffney for wrapping a necklace of missile defense systems around the planet to serve our "national interests"(neoconspeak for "whatever the world's sole superpower wants, the world's sole superpower gets"). So let me ask this... if the missile defense system is truly to protect the rest of the world from Iran, why don't we include Russia in the defense system planning, development, and deployent?
|
|||
|
|
Member |
And in fact, the Russians tried to do exactly that - which caused the neo-con cultists to go absolutely nuts. But a closer examination of the policies that they support or direction they continously push this hapless president to execute, one sees striking similarities to the policies of Germany and Italy in the late 1930's and early to middle 1940's. But this presidents policies have shattered any of the few remaining issues on what used to be the Republican platform with the blessings of the "Heritage Foundation", and the treasonous Mr. North: - Small Goverment? Mr. Bush inherited the smallest government in size since the Kennedy Administration. Now it is by far the largest in history. - Environment (formerly a standard republican-owned issue)? This president easily earns the moniker of "pollution president". - Health care (formerly a standard republican-owned issue)? Poof! - Fiscal responsibility/conservatism? This president more than doubled the national debt of all admininstrations and all the wars in only 7.5 years, while giving only the wealthiest .025% of the nation massive tax breaks. And he has outspent even the most shameless of the liberal administrations, with almost nothing to show for it. Poof! - Better leadership/handling of the country during time of war? Incompetence has been the mantra of this administration - the successes garnered during these past 7 years are not because of this administration, but despite this administration. - Foreign policy? Well that was what this article was largely about - and this president is a total failure in this regard. The NIE is clear that the policies of this administration have served to make the country far LESS secure. Going it alone (or with a cooalition of the bribed) is not foreign policy. Flagrantly sticking it to the other guy when that other guy has both the resources and a long memory to get up and recover from the problems they face is only going to build resentment and create new enemies. Lets hope the next guy (who is going to inherit the exact opposite of what the incumbant was fortunate enough to inherit) has the wisdom and smarts to get us back on track. It will indeed be difficult to do as lousy a job as the incumbant - but he'll be off to the right start if he ignores the Gaffney's, Brooks, and North's of the world. |
|||
|
|
Member |
I think Obama will have more to fear from the robber barons of the military-industrial-complex than from the Russians or Chinese. These war profiteers have siphoned billions of tax payer dollars to promote US aggression throughout the world. It's time to put an end to gun boat and six-gun diplomacy. We need to cease the saber rattling and engage in detente with our supposed adversaries. Obama has the opportunity to initiate rapproachment with Russia, China, North Korea, Venezuela, et al. I personally hope that his number goal internationally would be for the US to establish a direct relationship with the Palestinians, without interference from Israel. That is a daunting task for Obama considering the strangle hold that AIPAC, Israel and the American Jewish power base has on the US government. Obama is not anyone's Messiah, but he has a clear mandate for a clean sweep of the warmongering thugs from our government. |
|||
|
| Powered by Eve Community |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
Military.com Forums Sound Off! Peter Brookes Discussion Area Bullying Barack on MIssile Defense
