Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Posted: 9/19/2009 8:41:50 PM EST
http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=4479

Bottom line: It looks like some cheaper technologies may provide a faster way to provide some protection to Europe.
Link Posted: 9/19/2009 8:46:38 PM EST

Originally Posted By disco_jon75:
http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=4479

Bottom line: It looks like some cheaper technologies may provide a faster way to provide some protection to Europe.

But no deterrance to Russian expansion...

Which is what the Poles & others are pissed about....

They wanted US bases for economic and 'tripwire' reasons...

Link Posted: 9/19/2009 8:57:00 PM EST
So bring em into NATO. Putting missiles and a radar system in eastern Europe is an expensive solution looking for a problem.
Link Posted: 9/19/2009 9:06:25 PM EST
Originally Posted By badfish274:
So bring em into NATO.


Yes... this will really make the Ruskies happy!
Link Posted: 9/19/2009 9:17:18 PM EST
Originally Posted By badfish274:
So bring em into NATO. Putting missiles and a radar system in eastern Europe is an expensive solution looking for a problem.


There are better options. KEI for example.
Link Posted: 9/20/2009 1:23:05 AM EST
Originally Posted By badfish274:
So bring em into NATO. Putting missiles and a radar system in eastern Europe is an expensive solution looking for a problem.


What happened in Georgia last year?
Link Posted: 9/20/2009 1:30:17 AM EST
This sheild was more about diplomatic relations and international diplomacy than actual defense. Although that would have been useful also.


But then I'm an asshole "neo-con" that isn't a RP non interventionist.
Link Posted: 9/20/2009 2:28:52 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/20/2009 2:29:38 AM EST by jerrmy]
I don't care for how GBI and SM-3 are compared as if they are comparable. Each has their specific purpose and each have different costs involved. Of course a GBI will cost more...

People who don't know the difference see only numbers and think they can just substitute a cheaper on in.

I do think the SM-3 and THAAD are better options for Europe. Our GBI's cover the homeland, its EUCOM AOR that needs the coverage the most. I hate it for the Pol's, I was actually hoping to get a tour over there at some point
Link Posted: 9/20/2009 2:31:32 AM EST
In its most basic form, America sold both Poland and Ukraine to Russia....and I dont even know what we got in return.
I have no idea what BHO is doing but dumping allies to appease Putin isnt exactly what I consider encouraging progress in diplomacy.

My guess is that our president didnt sacrifice paws to gain advantage on the board.....he flat out lost them making bad moves. (which isnt a really good indicator that we can win this game)
Link Posted: 9/20/2009 2:38:41 AM EST
Cheaper doesn't mean better. They're trying to save cost while pushing the good-enough-for-now mentality.
Link Posted: 9/20/2009 2:57:58 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/20/2009 2:58:32 AM EST by Bobby_the_Hun]
Obama does not care for American Interests abroad let alone American Interests here, he wants the money to push his Ideology
Link Posted: 9/20/2009 3:27:17 AM EST
with Israel sabre rattling is this move to get russia to pressure iran into stopping nuke production? I can only think that would be the only worth this.

Link Posted: 9/20/2009 4:50:44 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/20/2009 4:52:47 AM EST by America-first]
If Obama had told Gates to sell the ABM system to the American people he'd have written a paper that justified the cost.

Gates is a whore.

Keep in mind that Gates originally recommended the very same system he now says is unnecessary.
Link Posted: 9/20/2009 4:54:53 AM EST
Originally Posted By theskuh:
with Israel sabre rattling is this move to get russia to pressure iran into stopping nuke production? I can only think that would be the only worth this.



At this point (and I'm afraid not much longer) Israel is the only one capable/willing to stop Iran's nuke production.
Link Posted: 9/20/2009 4:19:58 PM EST
Originally Posted By urbanredneck:
Originally Posted By badfish274:
So bring em into NATO. Putting missiles and a radar system in eastern Europe is an expensive solution looking for a problem.


What happened in Georgia last year?


Is Georgia a member of NATO? Did Iran launch ballistic missiles at Georgia?
Link Posted: 9/20/2009 6:23:08 PM EST
Originally Posted By TheAvatar9265ft:
Originally Posted By badfish274:
So bring em into NATO.


Yes... this will really make the Ruskies happy!


They are in NATO, I believe, 5 years at least.

By the way, still groggy from your hibernation trip?



Link Posted: 9/20/2009 6:26:55 PM EST
Originally Posted By jerrmy:
I don't care for how GBI and SM-3 are compared as if they are comparable. Each has their specific purpose and each have different costs involved. Of course a GBI will cost more...

People who don't know the difference see only numbers and think they can just substitute a cheaper on in.

I do think the SM-3 and THAAD are better options for Europe. Our GBI's cover the homeland, its EUCOM AOR that needs the coverage the most. I hate it for the Pol's, I was actually hoping to get a tour over there at some point


Well, against the IRBM threat from Iran, you can substitute SM-3.

I like your bottom line though. Keep the GBIs at home.
Link Posted: 9/20/2009 7:07:01 PM EST
Originally Posted By dport:
Originally Posted By jerrmy:
I don't care for how GBI and SM-3 are compared as if they are comparable. Each has their specific purpose and each have different costs involved. Of course a GBI will cost more...

People who don't know the difference see only numbers and think they can just substitute a cheaper on in.

I do think the SM-3 and THAAD are better options for Europe. Our GBI's cover the homeland, its EUCOM AOR that needs the coverage the most. I hate it for the Pol's, I was actually hoping to get a tour over there at some point


Well, against the IRBM threat from Iran, you can substitute SM-3.

I like your bottom line though. Keep the GBIs at home.


Speaking of home, like was said before, its a political move. We could coverage to the homeland effectively from here in AK and in the NE US. These other systems should have been the logical choice for EUCOM, but logic is overcome with politics more often than not.
Top Top