Thread: Obama scraps Bush-era Europe missile shield - do you approve?

President Barack Obama on Thursday scrapped the Bush-era plan for a missile shield to defend Eastern Europe (snip) The Bush-era plan had complicated ties with Russia, which objected to where the shield installations would be built.

Obama scraps Bush-era Europe missile shield - White House- msnbc.com

The Kremlin: Hands off our turf! The White House: Yes sir!


What do you think about this decision?

If America just focused on herself for a while, we'd be in a much better position. Like keeping useful defense projects like the F22 Raptor and scrapping foreign projects- like wars and stuff.

War time industry does stimulate the economy but... not the way it currently is.

Lets look at England, 50 years ago:
-'Ello old chap!
-'Ello!
-So how bout our Empire? Biggest in the world now...
-Indeed! But it costs so much to maintain and everyone is revolting and rioting.
-Ah! Let us simply retreat to our borders, let them deal with their issues, and play sports that no one else understands or can afford and invent absurd and unnecessary meals to distinguish ourselves as aloof.
-Huzzah! And we shall call said sports Crew, Cricket, Croquet, Polo and Golf; said meals shall be called Tea, Elevenses, High Tea and so forth.
-Good show old chap!
-Rather!

50 years later, England is sitting pretty with the most powerful currency in the world, and has few greater concerns other than missing tea time or who won the Henley.

The US can be the next England. Yes we can!

Originally Posted by khaos

The US can be the next England. Yes we can!

That is correct! But it also reminds me a little of Mr. Chamberlain and his "peace for our time" 70 years ago. Never mind....

Palin is watching for the missles from her house, dont worry.


/I am so sorry. It just popped in my head.

For those of us old enough to remember the "star wars" missile shield is a Reagan era program that the US wasted enough on to probably get health care off to a good start. Unlike national health insurance the missile shield program won't really work anyhow except to line the pockets of the military industrial complex. Unfortunately it is still going forward but on board ships.

Take consolation that on ships it can be moved around, and be useful to us here in America. Putting up a missile network in Europe doesn't really help the US at all. There is actually an airborne missile defense system in the works (that has probably been scrapped along with the rest of the air force, which is ridiculous... I'm not big on standing armies but we should at least have the tech to raise an arm if need be) which would only require a few boeings with big lasers in them.

Don't sweat the small stuff. What diff does it make when USSR controls(rules) europe? What diff does it make when China controls(rules) asia?
What diff does it make when Islam(naughty) rules Mid-East? What diff does it make when carib/sud america embargos US?

Hows the Favre doin'?

Disclaimer: I am a Czech living in the US who was born behind the iron curtain. I dread the increasing appetite of the Kremlin to have its fingers in European affairs again.

For me, this was a bad decision: Sen. John McCain, the Republican presidential candidate who lost to Obama in 2008, blasted the move as "seriously misguided" and said it would fray ties with Eastern European nations that "are increasingly wary of renewed Russian adventurism."

A few months ago, the former leaders of anti-communistic opposition sent an open letter to Obama about their worries regarding his policy towards Russia. Their bad dream just came true.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/17/wo.../17europe.html

This is a sad day for me and many people from Central and Eastern Europe who believed that US could be a strong ally who would secure stability and neutrality in the region. I'd better work on my Russian again now.

Originally Posted by sparq

This is a sad day for me and many people from Central and Eastern Europe who believed that US could be a strong ally who would secure stability and neutrality in the region. I'd better work on my Russian again now.

I was under the impression that remaining neutral meant "not taking sides", and that hosting a missile base was considered "taking sides". Which you have to agree, puts a big dent on your neutral status...

A shield of any sort, is not for defense - they are for protection against retaliation. You use it to protect yourself while trying to strike the opponent. That is what the missile shield was for, to attack and then intercept retaliation, in order to attack again.

I'm glad we are openly admiting that the shield was intended for Russia, because if anyone bought Bush's story about Iran... I've got some marsh... front water property for ya...

The right wing party currently in power in Russia, is the only alternative to the nationalist communists. Those would be a lot worse, I'm certain.

Originally Posted by davik

I was under the impression that remaining neutral meant "not taking sides", and that hosting a missile base was considered "taking sides". Which you have to agree, puts a big dent on your neutral status...

That is a fair comment but the playground is not even. There is no "not taking sides" in the region historically; neutrality and national independce was always a balancing act there. Russians already play they games, sponsor pro-russian politicians, activists, purchase key corporations, etc. US was IMO the only counter balance to that. Western Europe is not interested.