BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.

Subject: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 04 Jun 07 - 01:15 PM

Thanks to their government's sycophantic fawning to the warmonger GWB they will now become first strike targets due to their allowing the installation of a radar post in one, and an anti missile missile site in the other.
Welcome to the Scottish scenario, our weak kneed government allowed the USN to base Polaris submarines in the Holy Loch on our River Clyde some years ago, thus making us first strike targets as well.
It must be wonderful to have the whole wide Atlantic Ocean as a cushion to prevent you from being damaged by the nuclear strikes intended to take out YOUR weapons of war.
Now they too know how it feels to be regarded by America as dispensable!
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Megan L
Date: 04 Jun 07 - 04:16 PM

A bit bored tonight are we giok :p

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: kendall
Date: 04 Jun 07 - 04:21 PM

Bush is trying to start another cold war.
Will there be anything left of our reputation when he leaves the White House?

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Jun 07 - 04:28 PM

I guess the humane thing to do is wait until that stray missle that could have been shot down by the limited anti-missile system actually hits some city, and starts a global thermonuclear war. THEN we can use the old-fashioned, time honored policy of Mutually Assured Destruction to kill off any survivors in the rest of the world. THAT should satisfy you.

Heaven forbid we should intercept missiles and keep them from killing anyone.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Jun 07 - 05:07 PM

I have a feeling that up in high places (on both sides) people have decided that it was much easier running the world in the days of the Cold War, so they've decided to give it a another go.

The daft thing is the way they managed to fool people it was something to do with rival ideologies and all that.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 04 Jun 07 - 05:10 PM

"Heaven forbid we should intercept missiles and keep them from killing anyone."
Don't you mean any Americans Bruce ?

Surely you don't believe all this missile intercept rubbish. Just how many out of several dozen missiles do you think they MIGHT intercept?
It's all hot air and George W Bush PR
These countries are being sacrificed in the name of keeping reality at arms length!
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Jun 07 - 05:20 PM

"Surely you don't believe all this missile intercept rubbish. Just how many out of several dozen missiles do you think they MIGHT intercept?"

Since I worked on SDIO programs from 1985 until 1992, and presently work as a sub-contractor for a company involved with the active anti-missle program, the number that would be intercepted is dependent on the number of interceptors that are available. As of now, in Europe. ALL of them will get through, since the interceptors are not in place. In the case of a massive attack, one side can overwhelm the other by sending more missiles- BUT the ones planned for Europe ( 10) are to intercept the FEW that Iran or some smaller country would try to use. THOSE can be intercepted and the need for a GTW avoided- but I guess you would rather have a few hundred million people killed than admit that it might be a good idea.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: artbrooks
Date: 04 Jun 07 - 05:23 PM

Giok, my friend, not that I have any particular interest in defending Dubya, but wouldn't you admit that the UK acquiring its own nuclear weapons contributed to its becoming a target?

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Jun 07 - 05:43 PM

It doesn't really what what any of us think. What matters is what the people with the missiles and the H bombs think, in Moscow ans Washington. (The UK bombs are just a joke. A very dangerous and expensive joke, but a joke for all that.)

I'd like to think they are all just playing an elaborate game, as a way of keeping us all subservient, and that both sides are in it together. But I have a feeling it's a bit more complicated than that, and that some of the hostility is actually for real.

Extending NATO into former satellites, as a way of rubbing the Russians noses in it and making them feel humiliated, was really a very very stupid thing to do. And it hasn't done any favours at all to the former satellite states.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Jun 07 - 05:59 PM

McGrath,

Question: If a single missile is launched at a European city, say, Paris, would you rather

A. Have an anti-missile available to try to shoot it down before it hits?

B. Accept that Paris is blown up, and send lots of body bags?

C. Write off the people in Paris, and send over a half dozen or so nucs to the launching country to prevent it from happening again?

D. Surrender and start digging graves?

Or, you can provide other answers, if you have any.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: GUEST,eric blair
Date: 04 Jun 07 - 06:10 PM

I wonder whether we are at war with Oceania now or Eurasia? - I keep forgetting. The Ministry of Truth is not playing the game and I'm so weary of "New Speak" (spin). Perhaps it's the Soma that brother Huxley is prescibing that's affecting my memory. But I don't care. I'll atend tomorrow's 'Hate Session' (the tabloid press)and scream at the evil ones - whom-so-ever they be. We're all sheep now, anyway. Time for WW3 and start again from scratch.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Jun 07 - 06:42 PM

I think that those anti-missile missiles probably make it more likely there will be a nuclear bomb landing on Paris than would be the case if they weren't there. That's because Mr Putin seemingly thinks they make it more likely that there could be a nuclear missile landing on Moscow.

I might be wrong, that doesn't matter. Mr Putin might be wrong too - but that does matter, because it has consequences.

Or perhaps it's all a front, because a Cold War keeps the proles quiet. But one way and another it seems pretty likely that we are living in a more dangerous world than we were a little time ago, when it was just hyped up religious terrorists we had to worry about.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: GUEST, Ebbie
Date: 04 Jun 07 - 06:56 PM

bb, in order to give the anti-missiles a chance at intercepting, please see to it that the host of an incoming missile notifies us well in advance that it is coming. Make sure they also give us the coordinates.

That's the only way these anti-missiles have currently had ANY success.

I live in Alaska, remember?

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Jun 07 - 08:08 PM

And I work at OSC.


A 90% chance is a lot better than a thermonuclear war.


Hell, a 10% chance is better than a nuclear war!!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Jun 07 - 08:19 PM

And if taking that chance actually makes a nuclear war more likely?

Remember, it's not critics in the West you've got to convince, but Putin and the Russians. If they think that the extension East of Nato, and the introduction of anti-missile technology threatens Russia, that's a reality with consequences.

And it's as well to remember that there are significant advantages in a back-to-the-good-old-days Fortress Russia scenario, which will be evident to a KGB veteran.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Jun 07 - 08:26 PM

If the Russians are worried by 10 interceptors, they really need to work on their maintanance program.


On the other hand, are they ready to watch a war start because one madman in Iran launches one missile? It is obvious that the Revolutionary Guard is NOT under the control of the military.


Once a missile is launched, it will come down SOMEHWERE unless it is destroyed.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: toadfrog
Date: 04 Jun 07 - 08:40 PM

One sustpects that what bothers Putin is any activity by us in the Czech Republic or Poland, because he still regards them as Russian property. And although I share your view that the anti-missles are a boondoggel and an expensive waste of time, that attitude of Putin's is going to make trouble, sooner or later, in any case.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Jun 07 - 08:43 PM

I'd imagine there are at least as many madmen with missiles in the USA or Russia as in Iran. And a lot more missiles that reach a lot further. Plus, in both cases, a track record of starting wars, which Iran does not have.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Jun 07 - 08:45 PM

But the point is, it doesn't matter what we think or what the truth is - if Russia feels threatened and responds by threatening back, that is the reality, and it is a reality that threatens us all.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Ebbie
Date: 04 Jun 07 - 08:46 PM

Hey, I would guess that we would react the same way to the Philippines, say, as well as a host of other former 'possessions'.

I don't agree with bb that a 10% chance (by the way, it has not ever been as high as 10 %- NO anti-missile has engaged an incoming missile unless it had the coordinates. And that was only ONE out of SIX tries)Anyway, as I was saying, I don't agree that that slim to none chance makes us safer. Saddam letting us think that he had WMD- when he didn't - didn't make him safer, did it.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: kendall
Date: 04 Jun 07 - 09:57 PM

The fact is we want to station missles on Russia's doorstep! What would WE do if they pulled such a stunt? Have you forgotten the Cuban missle crisis? They were 90 MILES from our doorstep and we were ready to go to war if they were not removed.

It really does make a difference whose ox is gored.

I wouldn't trust Putin if his tongue was notorized! He's ex KGB and I'll bet he would love to have a reason to bring back communism. Bush could use a good distraction right about now. It worked for Reagan in Granada, and Bush one in Panama, it even worked for Clinton in Bosnia.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: TRUBRIT
Date: 04 Jun 07 - 10:44 PM

Guest.Eric Blair. You read my mind --- this is all so screamingly obviously 1984 right now -- I remember years back arguing wth my (then living) father in law that we were on the edge of 1984.....he totally disagreed but REREAD THE BOOK and look around you at what is happening and ask yoursef-- are we not living in a bad novel? (Eric Blair -- are you any relation to the great one - Keep the Aspidestra flying!)

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 04:10 AM

I just think that living in an island where about 6 nuclear bombs would finish us off, as opposed to living on a large land mass like the USA where your chances of survival are much higher gives you a different perspective on this problem.
There was a story about the US contemplating a scenario where battlefield nuclear weapons would be used in a European battle. Now that sort of 'distance lends enchantment to the view' sort of thinking, scares the poop out of me.
As Kendall said, remember the Cuban Missile Crisis, and imagine how you would feel if you were in the shoes of the inhabitants of these ex Soviet bloc country's citizens, with a primary target in your backyard.
At least I know that I am not alone in my fear of the messianic zeal of Messrs Bush and Blair now.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 04:44 AM

What's the phrase?

We fought the first world war in Europe. We fought the second world war in Europe. And if the idiots let us we'll fight the third world war in Europe...

:-(

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Megan L
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 04:46 AM

Pardon my ignorance but nuclear missile explodes on the ground there is fall out. nuclear missile iz blown up in flight doesnt that just give the fallout a wider field?

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: artbrooks
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 05:53 AM

Not really, Megan. If a ground burst occurs, then there would be tons (or mega-tons) of irradiated dirt, water, etc. to blow downwind. An airburst has significantly less fallout. When I used to participate in the kind of training exercises Giok mentioned above, a ground burst was considered to be a major error-to the military, fallout is undesirable, since it interdicts movement.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Wolfgang
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 07:40 AM

Bearded Bruce,

of course you are right in a trivial way: Given that a rocket with a nuclear warhead is fired on a town it is better to have the interception possibility even if it is not 100% sure. But McGrath asks the relevant question:

And if taking that chance actually makes a nuclear war more likely?

It is on a much larger scale the same question we had in threads about personal weapons. If an intruder has a gun and is going to shoot me would I prefer to have a gun of my own? Under those circumstances, yes. But since the intruders know that in Germany most people have no guns at home, they usually don't use their superior weapon power on me.

The most likely delivery of nuclear weapons in my eyes is not by open attack but by stealth and in a container or truck. What we discuss here, does not help for those cases.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 07:53 AM

He's ex KGB and I'll bet he would love to have a reason to bring back communism.

In one sense yes, but I don't really think it was really about "communism" then, and it isn't now. It's about centralised autocracy. Back in the Cold War it borrowed some of the rhetoric and trappings of communism or socialism. This time round it'll be dressed up as some kind of capitalism. Once it called itself feudalism. But those labels aren't too relevant. It's always about power.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 08:06 AM

To add to what McGrath says, the Soviet Union was NEVER a communist state, Marxist? Leninist? Stalinist? Socialist?, yes yes yes yes, but communist never.
I blame Senator McCarthy mainly, for this constant mislabelling of the USSR
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 12:40 PM

Anyone know if Russia's got new missiles - or are they 'making do' with the old Soviet era ones - most of which are heaps of rust?

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 12:51 PM

They just tested a new one about a week ago.
G

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Peace
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 01:06 PM

Were I Russia at this point, after Bush's assurance that the missile defense system is meant to protect Europe from states like Iran and Iraq, I would suggest that the stations from which missiles could be launched be manned by a Russian, an American and a representative of the country in which the missiles are located. That ought to shut the fuckers up, no?

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: kendall
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 01:35 PM

I stand corrected, and I do know the difference. What Putin wants is to go back to total control. We do refer to it as communism just as we continue to say Columbus discovered America.We know better, but old habits are hard to break.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 02:35 PM

"I don't agree with bb that a 10% chance (by the way, it has not ever been as high as 10 %- NO anti-missile has engaged an incoming missile unless it had the coordinates. And that was only ONE out of SIX tries)"

1. There have been more than 6 tests.
2. Not all results are unclassified

So, at what percentage of successful interception would YOU think that preventing the death of a few million civilians would be worthwhile?




"The fact is we want to station missles on Russia's doorstep! What would WE do if they pulled such a stunt? Have you forgotten the Cuban missle crisis? They were 90 MILES from our doorstep and we were ready to go to war if they were not removed."

The missiles in Cuba were IRBMs, like those that Iran presently has. They are useful only against GROUND targets, such as cities.
We are NOT putting IRBMs, or any other Ground to Ground missile in- the Interceptors being proposed are NOT useful against GROUND targets, and are overkill for aircraft. The ONLY effective use is against ballistic missiles.



"The most likely delivery of nuclear weapons in my eyes is not by open attack but by stealth and in a container or truck. What we discuss here, does not help for those cases."

Absolutely true- but Iran DOES have IRBMs, and to ignore them when there is SOMETHING that we can do to reduce the chance of their successful use is foolish.



"Were I Russia at this point, after Bush's assurance that the missile defense system is meant to protect Europe from states like Iran and Iraq, I would suggest that the stations from which missiles could be launched be manned by a Russian, an American and a representative of the country in which the missiles are located. That ought to shut the fuckers up, no? "

I have NO problem with that. Have them under UN control to knock down ANY missiles, from any country.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 03:14 PM

BB you are a war monger like your president!
G

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 03:18 PM

No, I am against a global thermonuclear war. YOU seem to be advocating a path that will lead to one, whether you intend it to or not. Results matter, not intent. That makes you the war-monger.


IMO, of course.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Peace
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 03:25 PM

I happen to know that neither of you guys are warmongers.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: pirandello
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 03:25 PM

There goes America again arrogantly strutting around planting missiles anywhere it feels appropriate; no change there then.
Anyone who can't see America's none-too-subtle imperialist agenda needs to get a reality check.
Of course any criticism will be answered by '9/11' while America seeks to fabricate another casus belli against Iran after the fashion of the war against Mexico, Cuba and Vietnam.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 03:26 PM

Sorry Bruce but it is your president who is being provocative in trying to site missiles on the doorstep of the Russian state.
Remember what the sainted JFK did in similar circumstances, and learn what it feels like when the boot is on the other foot.
G

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Peace
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 03:32 PM

The USA had intelligence at the time of the Cuban Missile Crisis that indicated Russia (USSR) was NOT prepared for a war. Thus the barricade--if you cross this line . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 03:42 PM

They may be under the illusion that the same thing applies here Peace. I wonder if it was on their own doorstep, would they take the same chance?
G.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Don Firth
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 03:56 PM

Bush and his cohorts start an unnecessary and illegal war in response to a terrorist attack, where it would have been much more rational—and effective—to respond as if it were a criminal act, which it was. Going into Afghanistan was quite probably justified, but the job was unfinished because Bush then started a war against a country that didn't have anything to do with the attack.

He stands there with his bare face hanging out and proclaims Iran and North Korea to be part of an "axis of evil," looming over them and saber-rattling until they acceleration their nuclear programs more out of fear of the American Colossus (led by a very small man) rather than any aggressive intent on their parts.

Now he wants to restart the Cold War.

That little weasel is the most dangerous human being on the planet!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: GUEST,eric blair
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 04:06 PM

TRUBRIT, no. I'm no relation, but I read this on the road to wigan pier:

"All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome." G.O.

This seems to sum up what we have become and what this debate is all about. Que sera sera. Pass the Soma, brother Huxley your brave new world is upon us.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Rog Peek
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 07:16 PM

Sort of reminds one of the Cuban missile crisis, with the shoe on the other foot.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 07:36 PM

Just imagine how the Cuban missile crisis might have played out if it had been Dubya and Putin, instead of Kennedy and Kruschev...

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Rog Peek
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 07:38 PM

Yes, I've been looking on Google for a 'Space Ship Gettaway Car'!

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 07:54 PM

the majority of Czechs are against the deployment..

In an age when one submarine carries enough missiles with multiple warheads to target all the major US cities, it seems this shield is a bit irrelevant.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 08:12 PM

It seems that there is a slight problem here with comprhension.

The 10 missiles that are being planned for are NOT capable of use against ground targets. I am not even sure if they are nuclear armed. They are to provide a shield against one or two missiles from a rogue state, and have NO STRATEGIC DETERRANCE VALUE, nor are they intended to.


I have to assume that those here would rather have the entire world involved in a nuclear war than to allow for the interception of a single IRBM aimed at a European city by some madman in Iran.


Maybe the US should just ignore it's treaty obligations and take NO steps to keep those millions of civilians from burning up, to make you happy.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Bobert
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 08:53 PM

First of all, any misile defense system in Europe is dumber than a box of creek rocks... Face it, Europe is too small to go throwing misiles, perhaps with muclear warheads on top of them, at anyone in the neighborhood... This would be absolutely suididal...

So let's move on here...

This isn't about anything other han Putin-head playing to his base much the way that Bush plays to his base...

I guess what I have problems with why both Bush and Putin feel so compelled to play to the 20% or less knothead reactionaries in each of their respective societies???

This is the real question here...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Ebbie
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 09:21 PM

"I have to assume that those here would rather have the entire world involved in a nuclear war than to allow for the interception of a single IRBM aimed at a European city by some madman in Iran."

Bearded Bruce, do you really intend to be that insulting?

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Don Firth
Date: 05 Jun 07 - 10:35 PM

Some people live in a world of constant fear. And for some strange reason, they seem to enjoy it there.

Who, I wonder, is going to start this theoretical nuclear worldwide catalclysm? Who's going to launch this theoretical IRBM at which European city, and why? Have we any plans to attempt to forestall such a thing with deplomacy and negotiation should it actually seem imminent? Of course not. That sort of thing just isn't in George W. Bush's book. He's a "wartime president." After all, he said so!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: GUEST,Kent Davis
Date: 06 Jun 07 - 12:49 AM

Did you hear that Putin is going to install missle defense systems in Belarus and Azerbaijan? Did you hear that Bush is actually opposing the defensive system, calling it "a threat to peace" and "an act of aggression", saying he won't stand for it, and even calling it "the Cuban Missle Crisis all over again", even though no offensive weapons are involved?
I didn't hear those things either. But if I heard them, then I would support Putin's position, not Bush's. What about you?

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Ebbie
Date: 06 Jun 07 - 01:01 AM

Silly, silly man.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Barry Finn
Date: 06 Jun 07 - 04:03 AM

This is a time for aggressive nations to raise a red flag warning, to call for arms & to expand & spend on it's military might after all we gorillia's haven't had our fill of breast beating yet. Bush needs to compete with the world after losing so badly at home & abroad & he fully intends to rise the head of another cold war. This move was intentional well knowing what Russia's reaction would be, what else would Russia do? We needed those defensive condoms like we needed a new cold war! This move is just what the doctor ordered for this administration & any fool that wants to back it is just fool that's been taken for the second idiot ride, remember WMD's & the war that followed, well here comes another brought to you by the same folks that brought you the last one & whose swallowing it again? Hook, line & sinker? Those same fools that swallowed the last one! I can't believe what some people will go for, time & time again, "When Will They Ever Learn, When Will They Ever Learn"?

When will some one try to use a little common sense & just once make a move that's in the direction of developing a peaceful & trusting relationship with other nations. I can't think of one nation that I'd consider a friend to the US, sure we have allies & those that we can threaten of have over a barrrel, even our neighbors Canada & Mexico would not consider us friends, partners or associates but not friends! Where in the world are our priorities, where the fuck do our leaders want to take us & how are they gonna take us into the future when it's looking more & more like we don't or won't have a future? With no friends & the number of those hating us, not to mention the growing list of enemies it's not a matter of 10 missiles or a few getting through it's more a matter of watching & waiting until the undeniable happens & the rest of the world saying good to be rid of the bastards, never cared for the way they did buiness anyway. We are becoming bad trash, not worth the saving. Putting missiles on Russia's doorstep was not the stupidest thing we've done but it's right up there with the rest.

Please, to except this move is to except the next invite to war that Bush will send down the pike. This is an invite to battle!

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: kendall
Date: 06 Jun 07 - 08:13 AM

There is a lot of money to be made in war and fear drives the war fever.

I was listening to a former CIA operative on radio. He has written a book called History ofThe American Empire. I'm surprised he was allowed to publish it. Anyone who thinks we are still Lilly White and blameless should check this out.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Wolfgang
Date: 06 Jun 07 - 11:22 AM

I have not yet read convincing (for me) arguments for those installations for I share McGrath's implicit (and explicit) fears that such installations though they might be useful in case of an attack may make such an attack more likely (or more severe) in the first place.

But there's one thing that makes me thinking twice: Vaclav Havel, former president of Czechoslovakia supports the installations for the Czech Republic. And Havel is a first class "peacenik". What brings such a man to this opinion? I have read that he supports the installations but have not read yet about his reasoning.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 06 Jun 07 - 11:41 AM

Maybe the US should just ignore it's treaty obligations and take NO steps to keep those millions of civilians from burning up, to make you happy

Bruce the US has often ignored it's treaty obligations when it suited them.
Even now GWB is trying to start his own version of the Kyoto Treaty 'cos he doesn't like the old version. It's the same old same old, "I will provide the ball, and you will play the game by MY rules" that the US tends to go in for in other spheres.
It is a wise president who knows the difference between reactive and proactive. Seems like this one doesn't though!
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Jun 07 - 02:15 PM

"First of all, any misile defense system in Europe is dumber than a box of creek rocks... Face it, Europe is too small to go throwing misiles, perhaps with muclear warheads on top of them, at anyone in the neighborhood... This would be absolutely suididal..."


The ONLY "anyone"s that the antimissile system would be targeting are IRBMs or ICBMs. To NOT go throwing anti-missiles at THEM is suicidal!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Giok,

I was not aware the US signed the Kyoto accords.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Rog Peek
Date: 06 Jun 07 - 02:26 PM

Yes Barry, if it was Gdubya's intention to deflect attention from his problems at home, he would not be the first and certainly not last head of state to risk and even precipitate a war in order to raise his popularity in the polls. Remember Margaret and the Falklands. To quote Ewan MacColl:-

…..the lady's reputation plummeted down into the red
But trouble blew up in the Falklands it was jam on her ginger bread
"Thank God for a nice little war" she said "This is Britain's finest hour"
So a couple of hundred squaddies died so she could stay in power.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Gulliver
Date: 06 Jun 07 - 02:41 PM

Comments on this morning's RTE radio news confirmed what Guest Petr said, that there is a large majority in the Czech Republic against the installations. The leader of that country is apparently a Euro-sceptic and sees this as a way of countering Euro influence.

Reports said there is also a large majority in Poland against these installations.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 06 Jun 07 - 02:42 PM

I know they didn't, and it's obvious that they didn't sign it because they weren't in charge, and couldn't set the agenda to match their own requirements.
This is what I was alluding to when I said they want to supply the ball and run the game, they don't want to follow anybody's rules but their own.
and...............................................

THEY BLOODY WELL SHOULD HAVE SIGNED THE KYOTO AGREEMENT!!

Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Jun 07 - 02:58 PM

It didn't need the Kyoto Agreement. The USA had already bound itself not to build this weapons system.

"Maybe the US should just ignore it's treaty obligations"

In 1972 President Nixon signed the Anti-Ballistic_Missile Treaty which outlawed these missiles. Thirty years later President Bush's administration gave notice of repudiating the treaty, and a few months later did so unilaterally.

These weapons aren't there to defend anyone, They are there to provide   defence contracts to friends and supporters. And in fact far from reducing the danger of a nuclear attack they increase the possibility danger of nuclear war.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Rog Peek
Date: 06 Jun 07 - 03:09 PM

I suppose GDubya could be boxing clever here. He says they are for defence, well in terms of defending America, they do provide a target a very long way from the USA.

I guess that's why the Czechs aren't too keen.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Don Firth
Date: 06 Jun 07 - 03:34 PM

Question:   who's got the contract to build these bases? Dollars to donuts, it's Halliburton or one of its subsidiaries.

Ferengi Rules of Acquisition:
Rule #35 — War is good for business.###For years Dennis Kucinich has been advocating the formation of a "Department of Peace." Of course, that's what the State Department is supposed to be, but for the life of me, other than racing around the world and attending receptions (party, party, party), I can't figure out what the hell Condoleeza Rice is good for.

Quite recently, there was an organnization of women in one of the plains states (Kansas, I believe), who tried to get some sort of initiative passed saying that the state favored the formation of a Department of Peace—dedicated to diplomacy and negotiation, and incorporating the principles of non-violent conflict resolution, to try to find peaceful solutions to international disagreements and disputes.

The reaction to this was most revealing. Howls of protest at the idea. The main thrust of these protests was that a "Department of Peace" would make us all look like "a bunch of wusses!"   Those were the exact words.

Obliterate the whole human race if necessary, but for God's sake, don't let anybody ever think that we look like "a bunch of wusses!"

If this world is destroyed, it will be at the hands of a collection of greedy, testosterone-saturated idiots! All balls, no brains!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Jun 07 - 03:43 PM

No - "War is Good for Business" is Ferengi Rules of Acquisition 34.
Rule 35 is "Peace is Good for Business". (See here.)

But the Ferengi are envisaged as being rather more advanced than the Bushangi.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Jun 07 - 05:09 PM

"And in fact far from reducing the danger of a nuclear attack they increase the possibility danger of nuclear war. "


I disagree with your opinion as stated above. In the case of an accidental, limited, or rogue state launch, an anti-missile system provides the ONLY alternative to a GTW ( That IS what the principle of MAD is intended to do, when one side is attacked: Otherwise, it is not effective.)

A chance of shooting down those limited missiles provides a chance to NOT launch strategic missiles, which would be in (greater) danger of destruction WITHOUT the anti-missile shield.

Giok,

You imply that we have treaty obligations in a case where we DID NOT sign the treaty????

Having an anti-missile system is like locking one's doors: it makes it harder for the robber ( , or WMD) to get in. It may not be perfect, but it is NOT a threat to anyone. Unless you feel that the robber has a right to enter at any time.

Ebbie,

IMO, those who advocate actions ( or lack of them) that can easily lead to nuclear war (whether they INTEND it, or not) should be called on their willingness to risk large numbers of human lives, and perhaps the survival of the species.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Jun 07 - 05:15 PM

Are you all so sure that it is BUSH making this an issue for political reasons? Ever consider that there are other players in the game?

From the Washington Post:

Message for Mr. Putin
Western leaders should tell him that a return to Soviet-style diplomacy won't help Russia.
Wednesday, June 6, 2007; Page A22


IN THE PAST few days, the anti-Western rhetoric of Russian President Vladimir Putin, which had been rising in pitch for several months, has reached Soviet levels of shrillness. He accused the United States of "imperialism" and "diktat" and threatened to target Europe with new Russian weapons. In an interview with foreign journalists, he cynically mocked Western democracy, saying that U.S. "torture, homelessness, [and] Guantanamo" and Europe's "harsh treatment of demonstrators" have left him as the only "absolute and pure democrat" in the world.

If the Cold War were still on, Western leaders would probably find it relatively easy to rebuff such barbs at today's summit of industrialized democracies in northern Germany. But this is a different era, and Mr. Putin himself will attend the summit, a member of a club -- the Group of Eight -- in which he clearly doesn't belong. His presence should remind the other seven members of how much has gone wrong in Moscow since they decided in 1998 to offer Russia membership in the hope that it was evolving into a liberal democracy. It should also give them the opportunity to make clear to Mr. Putin that his belligerence will not return his country to great-power status.

It's hard to know the real objective of Mr. Putin's bombast. In recent days the Kremlin's tone has become so blatantly propagandistic that some observers believe it is driven entirely by domestic politics. Mr. Putin is due to step down as president in nine months; though he has engineered the political system to "elect" whomever he chooses, his impending departure seems to have touched off power struggles in the corrupt clique around him, as well as waves of paranoia about domestic and foreign opponents.

Mr. Putin may be hoping, however, to create rifts between European governments and the United States, or between Western Europe and former members of the Soviet bloc that have joined NATO and the European Union. That would explain his insistence that the Bush administration's plan to locate a small missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic poses a critical threat to Russia, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. If so, the effort is beginning to backfire, as Mr. Putin himself seemed to acknowledge in his latest interview. Oddly, he suggested that the U.S. initiative had been launched precisely to provoke Russia's reaction and thus unite the West against Moscow.

The dilemma for the West is that Mr. Putin continues to be cooperative on a handful of crucial issues, including the effort to stop Iran's nuclear program. That's why President Bush still insists on calling the Russian president "Vladimir" and has invited him to the Bush family compound in Kennebunkport next month. Pragmatic engagement makes sense so long as it continues to get results. Two crucial tests will be Russia's posture on a new U.N. sanctions resolution against Iran and a Security Council vote on independence for Kosovo.

But the West cannot afford to respond to Mr. Putin's bluster with appeasement. The missile defense initiative should proceed or not on its own merits (some legitimate questions have been raised by NATO members and Congress); outreach by NATO and the European Union to neighbors suffering from Russian bullying should be accelerated, not stopped. Support for independent civil society and human rights groups in Russia should be increased -- not cut, as in the administration's budget proposal for next year. Mr. Putin should get the clear message that repression at home and Soviet-style diplomacy abroad will make his country less rather than more influential in the 21st-century world.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: kendall
Date: 06 Jun 07 - 05:17 PM

Israel knows how to deal with rogue nations.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 06 Jun 07 - 05:20 PM

The Washington Post seems to have considered everything except the possibility that Mr Putin may just be annoyed at someone putting military infrastructure in his back yard.
Seems to me he has every right to get annoyed too.
G.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Jun 07 - 05:21 PM

So, you keep your doors unlocked?

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 06 Jun 07 - 05:38 PM

Yup, difference with me is, I'm not paranoid like some people.
G.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Jun 07 - 05:44 PM

Israel knows how to deal with rogue nations.

"Rogue nations" being, for example, countries which persistently refuse to comply with UN Security Council Resolutions, carry out assassinations of political enemies and develop nuclear weapons covertly? Hmmm...
...............................
From today's Guardian:

This Russian risk could yet dwarf our blunder on Iraq:

Will history tell us we were fools? We worried about the wrong war and made the wrong enemies. In the first decade of the 21st century the leaders of America and Britain allowed themselves to be distracted by a few Islamist bombers and took easy refuge in the politics of fear. They concocted a "war on terror" and went off to fight little nations that offered quick wins.

Meanwhile these leaders neglected the great strategic challenge of the aftermath of cold war: the fate of Russia and its mighty arsenals, its soul tormented by military and political collapse, its pride undimmed. They danced on Moscow's grave and hurled abuse at its shortcomings. They drove its leaders to assert a new energy-based hegemony and find new allies to the south and east. The result was a new arms race and, after a Kremlin coup, a new war. Is that the path we are treading?...

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Don Firth
Date: 06 Jun 07 - 07:41 PM

#34 or #35. Depends on the web site you use as a source. They tend to disagree.

Anyway, "war is good for business" seems to be one of the major motivating factors in American foreign policy.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Don Firth
Date: 06 Jun 07 - 08:51 PM

With apologies to the fine Canadian (Native American) actor, Graham Greene, and one of the characters he portrays.

In at least one respect, George W. Bush reminds me a bit of the demolitions expert, Edgar K. B. Montrose, on the Canadian comedy-variety (or whatever the hell it is) television program, "The Red Green Show." The "K. B." stands for "Ka-BOOM!!

Red:   Looks like you're missing a finger there, Edgar.
Edgar:   Not missing, Red. I know exactly where it is. It's up in the quarry, pointing at the 'No Smoking' sign!

Edgar K. B. Montrose never encountered a problem he figured couldn't be fixed if you just used enough explosives.

Ka-BOOM!!!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Ebbie
Date: 06 Jun 07 - 10:15 PM

Ebbie,

"IMO, those who advocate actions ( or lack of them) that can easily lead to nuclear war (whether they INTEND it, or not) should be called on their willingness to risk large numbers of human lives, and perhaps the survival of the species." Bearded Bruce

Bruce, you are assuming that YOUR opinion on counteracting the risk is worth more than anybody else's. Keep in mind that there are people- people with good brains, people who have studied these situations, people with experience in diplomacy and accountability - who do not share your opinion.

People who are terribly sure of the rightness of their opinions are scary people. I would far rather keep asking questions than persist in requiring everybody to come to the same conclusion as me. Or you.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Jun 07 - 09:51 AM

IMO, those who advocate actions ( or lack of them) that can easily lead to nuclear war (whether they INTEND it, or not) should be called on their willingness to risk large numbers of human lives, and perhaps the survival of the species."

I don't find anything to disagree with in that statement. I just disagree with bruce as to whom those people are and what it is they are advocating. I think Simon Jenkins put it very well in the article I linked to a couple of posts ago:

"...Who knows that the Iraq war may seem a footling incompetence alongside the west's misjudgment of Russia over the past decade? Following cold war with cold peace may yet prove a historic error. And it was gratuitously unnecessary."

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Peace
Date: 07 Jun 07 - 09:53 AM

Jaw jaw is better than war war.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Peace
Date: 07 Jun 07 - 09:55 AM

I just struck me that there is a solution.

If the real reason for the installations is to intercept missiles from Iran/Iraq, then build the stations in Russia. have them manned by people from the US military and the Russian military.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Jun 07 - 10:18 AM

With the contracts for building them going to Russians...

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Don Firth
Date: 07 Jun 07 - 01:00 PM

Bingo! Heard on the news this morning that that's just what Putin suggested to Bush!

Okay, George, it's your move. Whatcha gonna do?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 07 Jun 07 - 01:21 PM

Haliburton opens Moscow branch office!
G

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 07 Jun 07 - 01:28 PM

Peace,

Good idea!

Ebbie,

"People who are terribly sure of the rightness of their opinions are scary people."

I agree. Al Gore, Moore, Hillary Clinton, Pelosi, and a number of people posting here come to mind. I wonder why THEY don't need to be reminded of the fact?

"Bruce, you are assuming that YOUR opinion on counteracting the risk is worth more than anybody else's. Keep in mind that there are people- people with good brains, people who have studied these situations, people with experience in diplomacy and accountability - who do not share your opinion."

I am aware of that- hence the IMO. But there are "people- people with good brains, people who have studied these situations, people with experience in diplomacy and accountability - who do share (my) opinion."

And around HERE, I am far more experienced with SDIO and ballistic missle defense than almost all of those posting.

I was UMPAC system manager for LACE, Mission Ops for RME, Data Manager for Clementine and MSTI-3, ond worked on EO-1, the civilian multispectral s/c. ( Warfighter went in the drink, Nemo was never launched. So, I have a slight understanding of the basics.

You will note that I hardly ever tell musicians they are wrong about musical topics, as THAT is not my field of expertise.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 07 Jun 07 - 01:45 PM

Bush, Putin agree to cooperate on missile shield plan
POSTED: 1:34 p.m. EDT, June 7, 2007
Story Highlights• Putin tells Bush he will drop objections to missile shield if it's in Azerbaijan
• U.S. president says better to work together than to create tensions
• Security breached near G8 summit venue; police chase Greenpeace boats
• G8 leaders seal deal aimed at cutting greenhouse gas emissions

HEILIGENDAMM, Germany (CNN) -- U.S. President George W. Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed Thursday to cooperate on missile-defense systems, cooling tensions between the two leaders at the G8 summit in Germany.

They had met one-on-one privately during the summit of leaders of the world's richest nations, being held in the resort of Heiligendamm on northern Germany's Baltic coast.

"We have an understanding about common threats, but we have differences. The difference is the ways and means in which we can overcome these threats," Putin said after meeting with Bush.

"It's much better to work together than to create tensions," Bush said. "He expressed his concerns to me. He is concerned that the missile-defense system is not an act that a friend would do."

Earlier Putin told Bush that Moscow would drop its objections to a planned missile-defense shield if the radar-based system was based in Azerbaijan instead of the Czech Republic and Poland, as Washington has proposed.

Putin's proposal to drop objections if the system were set up in Azerbaijan was a welcome surprise, as Moscow's rhetoric condemning the shield and the relationship between Russia and the United States were beginning to be reminiscent of the Cold War era.

Bush had previously said the plan was meant to block possible attacks from Iran and other nations, but Putin was concerned the systems would be on Russia's doorstep -- in Poland and the Czech Republic -- and could be converted into offensive weapons.

Last weekend, Putin warned that his country could aim nuclear weapons at European targets unless Washington abandoned its proposal. Both men have tried to calm the rhetoric since then.

"They're not a military threat. They're not what we should be hyperventilating about. What we ought to be doing is figuring out ways to work together," Bush told reporters following his last meeting with Tony Blair before he steps down as British prime minister later this month. (Chemistry on show)

Putin said he had suggested using an existing radar station in neighboring Azerbaijan, which covers all of Europe.

"The existing agreement makes it possible for us to do this. And the president of Azerbaijan stressed he would be glad to contribute to world security and stability," Putin said. He said he met with the Azerbaijan president on Wednesday.

Riot police use water cannons
The G8 summit's host, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, said G8 leaders had sealed a deal that will lead to "substantial" cuts in greenhouse gas emissions and a post-Kyoto deal by 2009.

She said G8 countries had agreed to consider her aim for a 50 percent cut in emissions by 2050, but leaders do not appear to have committed to any specific targets.

Riot police blasted protesters with water cannon to keep them away from the security fence surrounding the summit venue, while other protesters led police on a boat chase on the Baltic Sea.

CNN's Frederik Pleitgen said the incursion by Greenpeace environmental activists in boats was considered a serious breach as summit organizers had been bringing delegates in by sea after protesters blocked roads around the venue.

Riot police clashed with protesters near the main entrance along the 12-kilometer (7-mile) security fence sealing off the summit, firing repeated blasts from four water cannons.

About 200 officers stood between nearly 2,000 protesters and the razor wire-topped fence, Reuters reported. The activists tried to charge them but were repelled with several volleys of water blasts.

'Keep promises'
Among those participating in the summit are pop stars and philanthropists Bono and Bob Geldof, who said the bickering over the anti-missile systems is overshadowing the anti-poverty agenda.

Bush agreed, saying Thursday that the summit should stick to the priorities of climate change and aid to Africa, including the fight against HIV/AIDS. He and Merkel drew up the agenda Wednesday.

"They are not keeping their promises" to help Africa, Bono told CNN's Ed Henry in an interview Wednesday.

At the Gleneagles, Scotland, G8 Summit in 2005, boosted by the Live 8 concerts and the efforts of Bono and Geldof, world leaders agreed, at the urging of Blair, to a huge program of debt reduction for the "forgotten continent" of Africa, and massive boost in efforts to curb AIDS, malaria and other diseases.

G8 leaders in 2005 promised an extra $25 billion for Africa by 2010, according to Jamie Drummond, executive director of DATA (Debt, AIDS, Trade, Africa), an advocacy organization working to eradicate poverty and AIDS in Africa.

DATA also encourages African leaders to support democracy, accountability and transparency.

Bono, a board member, has persistently lobbied the governments of the world's leading industrial democracies, which make up the G8, to keep their financial commitments.

At the end of 2006, just $2.3 billion of the $25 billion promised by G8 leaders by 2010 -- not including debt relief -- had been paid, Drummond told CNN's European Political Editor Robin Oakley.

"The G8 as a whole in 2006 did about half of the aid levels they promised -- just under half. They're planning for 2007 to do just under a third of what they promised. So there's a pattern of off-track behavior," Drummond said.

According to DATA, Britain and Japan are meeting their promises.

Canada, the United States and Germany are slipping behind, and France and Italy are at the bottom.

Bush said Thursday the United States was trying to do its part.

"I asked Congress to double our initial commitment and approve an additional $30 billion for HIV-AIDS prevention, for care, and for treatment over the next five years," he said.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Peace
Date: 07 Jun 07 - 01:49 PM

I will be dipped in shit. So some folks at the upper levels of government are actually trying to make sense? I am speechless.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 07 Jun 07 - 02:03 PM

Everybody at the G8 summit except the USA and Russia have signed an agreement to reduce greenhouse gasses.
Now what does that tell you?
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 07 Jun 07 - 02:20 PM

And HOW many of the European countries who DID sign the Kyoto accord have met the goals of it?

Seems to me at least the US is honest and did not sign what they were not going to meet.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 07 Jun 07 - 02:51 PM

I never thought I'd say this, but it's beginning to look like the only sane American on the subject of global warming is Arnold Schwarznegger.
Not even trying is not an option Bruce, we're talking the fate of the whole world here, and not just whatever one GWB inhabits!
Giok.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 07 Jun 07 - 03:03 PM

"The G8 summit's host, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, said G8 leaders had sealed a deal that will lead to "substantial" cuts in greenhouse gas emissions and a post-Kyoto deal by 2009.

She said G8 countries had agreed to consider her aim for a 50 percent cut in emissions by 2050, but leaders do not appear to have committed to any specific targets.

....

Bush agreed, saying Thursday that the summit should stick to the priorities of climate change and aid to Africa, including the fight against HIV/AIDS. He and Merkel drew up the agenda Wednesday."

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: GUEST,Kent Davis
Date: 08 Jun 07 - 01:10 AM

Ebbie et al,
Let's re-read those posts of June 6, 12:49pm and 1:01pm and 5:15pm, shall we? Hypothetically, if the defensive system had been Putin's idea originally, and Bush had been the one who initially objected, what would the Mudcat consensus have been about Bush's (hypothetical)objections?

Kent Davis

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 08 Jun 07 - 01:01 PM

It is possible and desirable to detach the action, from the proposer of that action.
Ergo all warlike actions are wrong whichever paranoid idiot decides it would be a good idea!
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Jun 07 - 01:19 PM

If Putin had fixed up with Castro to stick the missiles in Cuba, for example, against the express wish of the USA? I think that most of us would have seen that as a pretty stupid thing to do.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Rog Peek
Date: 08 Jun 07 - 01:23 PM

McGrath - Unless of course things wern't going too well for Putin nat home.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 08 Jun 07 - 01:26 PM

I see that there is still a lot of BS here from people who do not know the difference between and IRBM with a nuclear ground attack weapon and an anti-missile with a kinetic kill warhead.

The comparison to the Cuban Missile crisis is NOT a valid one.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Jun 07 - 01:39 PM

I haven't seen any posts which seemed to indicate a failure to appreciate that distinction bruce drew attention to.

I was talking about a hypothetical 2007 Cuban missile crisis, in line with Kent Davis's suggestion.

An anti-missile system stuck down unilaterally by Russia in a country neighbouring the USA would undoubtedly be seen as a provocative and belligerent act. And would be correctly so seen.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 08 Jun 07 - 02:10 PM

McGrath,

Why?

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 08 Jun 07 - 02:13 PM

thread drift.

bb - in answer to your question on who is meeting their kyoto targets..
seems like a number of European countries are.. close to or exceeding
them.. eg. UK, Germany.. kyoto targets

(bear in mind Germany also has been spending billions per year on improving the infrastructure of the former East Germany at the same time)
and with their energy policy - they have set out to have 20% of energy from renewables by 2020 (they expect to exceed it more like 30%)
with their cash incentives for solar etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 08 Jun 07 - 02:14 PM

IMO, a joint US/Russian system would be a good idea.

8-{E



NATO cautious on Russia shield offer

POSTED: 8:55 a.m. EDT, June 8, 2007

Story Highlights• NATO reacts cautiously to Russian offer to base missile shield in Azerbaijan
• Russia's Vladimir Putin made offer to U.S. President Bush at G8 summit
• Russia fears shield aimed at it; U.S. says to stop missiles from "rogue" states

BRUSSELS, Belgium (Reuters) -- NATO reacted cautiously on Friday to a Russian offer for the United States to use a Russian-controlled radar in Azerbaijan for a missile defense shield, questioning whether its location was ideal.

Russian President Vladimir Putin proposed to President George W. Bush at a Group of Eight summit on Thursday that Washington use the Azeri radar instead of planned missile interceptors in Poland and a radar in the Czech Republic.

Moscow suspects the shield is aimed at Russia. Washington says it is to stop missiles from "rogue" states.

"I think it is a bit close to the rogue states we are discussing," NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer told a conference about the proposed Russian alternative.

"But it's a bit too early in the day for my final judgment. It is always useful when two presidents are constructively talking to each other on this," said de Hoop Scheffer, who has promoted NATO as a forum for talks over the shield plan.

In Baku, Azeri Foreign Minister Elmar Mamedyarov told reporters Russia had approached his government with a proposal to use the Qabala radar jointly with the United States, for example in sharing information obtained by it.

"Azerbaijan is ready for such consultations," he said. Azerbaijan had held what he called "rudimentary consultations" with the United States about the radar.

The Qabala radar has operated in the north of Azerbaijan since 1985 and is manned by Russian military who lease it from the Azeris. One of the biggest radars in the world, it scans the Indian Ocean, the Middle East and most of North Africa -- and can detect missiles launched in those areas.

Bold proposal
Bush did not directly mention Putin's offer in comments to reporters on Thursday. U.S. officials have in the past stressed they regarded the proposed central European sites as ideally placed to intercept missiles coming from the Middle East.

White House national security adviser Stephen Hadley said Putin's idea was "a bold proposal." U.S. officials would study the offer and discuss it with the Russians.

Putin said that if Washington took up the offer he would not follow through with a threat to re-direct Russian missiles to targets in Europe. The Kremlin said Putin's idea would remove any need for a U.S. radar anywhere in eastern Europe.

Poland said it had received no signals from the United States of any change of policy on the shield.

"From the Polish point of view, the negotiations are ongoing," Foreign Ministry spokesman Robert Szaniawski said. "We have not received any signals from the U.S. side that they were planning to abandon plans of cooperation (on the shield)."

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 08 Jun 07 - 02:20 PM

Oh I wish I could believe everything I read.
G

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Jun 07 - 03:46 PM

Why would it be seen as provocative and belligerent? Because that's the way the US government would see it, or would choose to see it. Be honest. How many times have you seen Cuba referred to in the US media as "America's backyard" and so forth?

Why would it be correct to see it as provocative? Because it would be obvious in advance that the US government would react in that way, and therefore the action would have to be seen as intended to be intended to provoke that reaction.

The fact that the hypothetical anti-missile missiles on Cuba would pose no kind of threat to the United Sates in real terms is beside the point.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Rog Peek
Date: 08 Jun 07 - 05:46 PM

There seems to be a suggestion in some quarters that the type of missile that GWB says will be installed, is the type that will be installed. He must be much more honest and trustworthy than the Tony Blair who warned us of 45 minute WMD's.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: GUEST,eric blair
Date: 08 Jun 07 - 06:46 PM

Try www.bushisantichrist.com

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Ebbie
Date: 08 Jun 07 - 08:51 PM

Yep, honest and trustworthy are the first two attributes that come to my mind when I think of George Bush.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: GUEST,eric blair
Date: 11 Jun 07 - 07:05 PM

You forgot Truth, Justice and the American Way, Ebbie.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Jun 07 - 07:38 PM

Truth, Justice and the American Way Well, one out of three ain't so bad.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: GUEST, Ebbie
Date: 11 Jun 07 - 07:56 PM

Sadly, I suspect that his is the American way. Maybe only temporarily. One can hope.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: Teribus
Date: 12 Jun 07 - 06:40 AM

So Putin is not so much against this "defence shield" being established as being against where the US intends setting it up.

I listened to him the other day when he outlined his proposal for setting the system up in Azerbaijan.

He knows full well that the system is purely defensive and that in itself it can only pose an indirect threat to Russia and her people.

As someone has already said on this thread any IRBM hit by one of these interceptors must come down somewhere. The amount of damage done will depend if the warhead has been activated.

The Americans selected the Czech Republic and Poland for their optimum sites (they should know, it is after all their system). They are clearly looking at a rogue launch from Iran targeted at Europe. I surmise that with this system the radar has to acquire the target and have enough time to pass the required firing solution to the anti-missile-missile site, all of which has to be done before the IRBM reaches max height, i.e. the IRBM has to be hit while it is climbing.

Vlad Putin's concern is that once hit from a missile fired from Poland the knocked down missile, irrespective of whether it has armed itself or not, poses a threat as it could very well land in Russian territory.

His proposal is that both the acquisition radar and the missiles are based in Azerbaijan and that they acquire the IRBM immediately after launch with the IRBM still in boost phase. You knock the fuel off the IRBM and it tumbles into the Caspian, great if you're a Russian, bloody awful if you're a Sturgeon.

I haven't got a clue if the system as currently configured can cope with the short reaction times required to fulfil the demands put on it by Putin's suggestion.

I agree with BB, if the Iranians are developing nuclear capable IRBM's with ranges out to 4500km, then a defence system against that threat has to be put in place. I also agree with Wolfgang that IRBM's fired from Iran, North Korea, or wherever do not pose the most likely threat. That threat is the bomb smuggled into a country and detonated by some anonymous international terrorist organisation, that bomb having been supplied by some "rogue state".

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Jun 07 - 06:49 AM

Wouldn't have to be a "rogue state" - there are rich people and private organisations with access to a level of resources comparable to some countries. Bin Laden is one, but not the only one.

Subject: RE: BS: Poland & Czech Rep. #1 targets now.
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 12 Jun 07 - 04:26 PM

one only has to think this through for a minute..
right, the Iranians are going to launch a surprise first strike on EUROPE? knowing full well they are going to get annihilated shortly thereafter..
with missiles they dont yet have anyway - and which are going to be shot down with US BMD missiles which mostly miss anyway (or dont launch).

If the Iranians are developing nuclear weapons- it is primarily to deter from a US attack (Seems thats the lesson that they and the Dear Leader from North Korea learned after the US' Iraq adventure.)

But you have to admit that it was a clever move by Putin - if Iran really did have nuclear weapons and long range ballistic missiles and the US really did have BMD technology that works then access to a Russian radar in the mountains north of Iran would be ideal.
(Well, Bush said lets have our experts look at it) and thats probably where it will stay, and Putin gets to show that the new US bases are not about defending from Iranian missiles.