The Appalling Timing of Obama’s Missile Defense Decision
On the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland? Our staunch allies in Central and Eastern Europe have every right to feel disappointed.
The timing of the announcement could not have been more appalling. In fact, I cannot recall any recent example of “What on Earth could they have been thinking?” that is more historically insensitive and potentially more damaging. The Obama administration’s scrapping of the missile defense shield over Eastern Europe on the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland clearly takes the cake. It’s as if Hillary Clinton grabbed the “reset” button and whacked it on the heads of the Polish and Czech leaders, just to make sure it’s working. And working it is. “We value the U.S. president’s responsible approach towards implementing our agreements. … I am ready to continue the dialogue,” said Russian President Dmitry Medvedev. Kremlin-controlled Channel One and Rossiya TV, meanwhile, were in the gloating mood, celebrating the “fiasco of a long-standing anti-Russian policy” by the former Soviet satellites and their one-time enablers in Washington (link in Polish).
The official and unofficial reactions in the countries affected were predictably caustic. Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk initially refused to take calls from the administration, including Hillary, though he later spoke with Obama. The current center-right Civic Platform government subsequently tried to play down the implication of the American decision, even going as far as to suggest that some alternative plans that might or might not be on the table, such as placing Patriot missile batteries in Poland, were actually a better idea than the original shield. Not many other politicians and commentators bought it.
Eastern and Central Europe have generally been strongly pro-American in the past, and even the anti-Americanism, at least in Poland, has rarely been the rabid, hysterical obsession evident in many other parts of the world. Instead, it has been more of an example of a weary cynicism of any supposed friends and allies (cynicism not unjustified in light of the last three hundred years of Polish history). And there was plenty of that cynicism to go around in the comments sections of Polish online newspapers. “I guess we didn’t suck up hard enough [to the Americans]” or “Sad, at the time when our boys are giving their lives in their [America’s] wars” were some of the typical reactions from readers.
What does Obama get out of this decision, aside from some minor budgetary savings, hardly a top priority in Washington at the moment? Since the missile shield was meant to protect the European allies from WMD strikes by rouge states, Obama’s thinking seems to be that a more successful avenue of dealing with Iran’s nuclear ambitions is not through defense and deterrence but through diplomacy — in this instance, getting Russia to apply additional pressure on Tehran. That might indeed happen, if the Kremlin thinks the American capitulation on the missile shield deserves some sort of a reward, but if anyone seriously thinks the mullahs will be diverted from their plans by token Russian sanctions and finger-wagging then they’re likely to be disappointed. In any case, the Kremlin made it blatantly clear that no deal to that effect has been made with the Americans and that Obama’s decision to scrap the missile shield was his own initiative.
Page 1 of 2 Next ->
Arthur Chrenkoff is a former blogger, creator of the “Good news from Iraq” series, and author of Night Trains, a supernatural alternate reality war thriller.
 |
 |
 |
Podcasts |  PJM Home |
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
102 Comments
1. Ed Wallis:Indeed:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/09/did_america_betray_us_or_it_wa.html
Sep 20, 2009 - 12:31 am 2. alex:The earliest President Bush’s missile defense shield could possible be in place is 2018, if everything went absolutely to specifications and testing, so people should stop discussing this as if it was about to be shipped to Poland in the springtime. It was not even off the drawing board, and nobody knows if it even works.
The earliest deployment the new plan submitted by joint chiefs of staff is in 2011, using existing SM3, then updating the system every several years. In addition Chemical Laser systems have many advantages over kinetic energy systems and are coming on online the next few years to supplement existing systems
What this White house cannot seem to do is present their case in a reasonable, or even coherent manner. For some reason there is serious disconnect between policy and policy disclosure and support.
Sep 20, 2009 - 1:44 am 3. Francis W. Porretto:President Obama would be well advised to hire a few Republican advisors, at least they will be able to manage the public face of the White house in a far more professional manner
This article embeds the assumption that Obama believes that what he’s done, by throwing the young democracies of Eastern Europe to the dubious mercies of the Russian bear, somehow advances American interests.
The assumption is incorrect.
Obama’s international conduct to date has shown nothing but contempt for the country he supposedly “leads.” No one supposedly as smart as Obama could possibly believe that groveling to hostile powers, undercutting our military, and undermining our intelligence services could somehow advance or maintain American interests, or any other worthy goal. We’re left with two choices: either he’s very, very stupid, or he’s consciously and deliberately working against America’s interests, and the interests of America’s true allies.
We’ve allowed a bad man with an evil agenda into the Oval Office. Vladimir Putin himself could not do free peoples more damage, more swiftly. Until conservatives generally accept this, we will continue to argue with Obamunist policies, as if they were merely misguided, when in point of fact their direction is perfectly well thought out.
Sep 20, 2009 - 2:56 am 4. Brian Richard Allen:“” The Appalling Timing of Obama’s Missile Defense (Appeasement) “”
Well, yes.
That timing is appalling.
Just like his every other!
Sep 20, 2009 - 3:11 am 5. Don Wise:If anybody saved my 12 pager about the sinister, beneath-the-surface, undermining of the USA by the forces now in office
just keep watching the news to see it come to pass.
A few weeks ago we caught the Russians trying to slip missiles to Syria and most of the weapon caches found in the Middle East are via Russia.
Now we bow to them (Russia) on the missile defense shield for the Middle Europeans?
On the anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Poland! (September 17, 1939)
That should teach what few allies we have left about how serious we are about America’s “WORD”!
“HOW TO LOSE FRIENDS AND INFLUENCE THE ENEMY!”
It continues while this President smacks allies in the face and coddles the tyrants.
We have fights with Mexico and Canada, left the door open for the annihilation of Israel
and we’ve coddled and bowed down to Iran, Venezuela, Russia and North Korea.
It doesn’t take a Crystal Ball people…
Sep 20, 2009 - 3:26 am 6. Matthew:“On the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland?”
But … it’s not supposed to be anything to do with russia, remember? These radar things were supposed to counter the threat from iran! Prez bush went to great lengths to point out this had nothing to do with russia. Why do you keep bringing up russia?
They were a stupid idea to counter a non-existent threat. Iran isn’t threatening western europe – it’s threatening israel (hint: that’s in the _other direction_ from poland), and the US and israel could lay waste to tehran if iran ever made good on that threat (britain and france could do it if they were ever attacked). The US has an alternative missile defense that DOES work (Aegis), and that’s not going anywhere. As a counter to russia, these things were useless – at best they might be able to intercept (or almost intercept) a few rockets coming out of russia, but if russia ever launches nuclear weapons at the west, it won’t be launching just a few. It never seemed (to me) to be anything more than a cheap way to get up the kremlin’s nose while putin was playing energy czar (yes, I have really always believed it’s for russia’s benefit – iran didn’t seem to give a damn about it).
It’s a waste of money. Something that conservatives seem to be fine with as long as they can drape a flag over it.
Sep 20, 2009 - 4:07 am 7. genghis:Whatever the tactical advantages or disadvantages of this action, the timing of its anouncement is beyond comprehension. Perhaps the calculation was that few would recognize the significance of this date. Certainly in America, where our modern system of (sic) higher education guarantees a depth of historical knowlege extending back maybe three weeks, they were correct. Obviously not so in Eastern Europe. Perhaps it was to serve as a signal to the Russians, a green light to allow them to reassemble their disassembled empoire. It’s hard to believe that Obama and his geniuses at State would favor such a reversal. No, the only reasonable explanation is that the Administration acted out of elemental ignorance, fostered by hubris and the belief that they are so smart, so clever, so intellectualy superior, tht it would be beneath them to check on such a small detail as the timing of such an announcement.. It’s amateur night at the White House.
Sep 20, 2009 - 4:19 am 8. fauxscot:I have been following, and for a while, working on various ‘Star Wars’ tech since Ronald Reagan dreamed it up, way back in the 1980’s.
Abandoning something that doesn’t work, and has little chance of performing as advertised hardly qualifies as a bad decision. You are all entitled to your political opinions, but as a matter of fact, you’d better get a different soapbox to support your contention that we’re pulling working tech out of a place where it’s already doing an effective job. That’s bullshit by the ignorant.
As to the political aspects, support for the former Soviet republics can be demonstrated and guaranteed in many ways. “Amateur night” at the Whitehouse is what got us into two wars, so if you want to complain on Obama’s performance, I’ll refer you to that of the reformed drunk who occupied the big chair while all this bad shit went down, and grin while you describe his many foreign and domestic successes…. many of which will take years to repair. Idiocy and poor judgment, mediocrity and failure all got comprehensive demonstrations during the reign of the one-party Republican era. That era, is gone, and suck it up boys, gone for good. You broke it, and you own it, to paraphrase Republican Colin Powell. If government had been less focused on greed, social control, religious indoctrination, and arbitrary foreign policy, perhaps you’d have a credible chance of being part of the process now instead of impotent rants from the sidelines.
If you want to criticize, best to start with yourselves.
Sep 20, 2009 - 5:04 am 9. jimpres:The Russian Bear is smiling again.
1.) Poland was occupied by three countries for about 150 years. Russia was one.
2.) You had to learn Russian the Polish language was outlawed.
3.) Poland just became independent in 1918. From the three countries including Russia.
4.) 1 Sept at Westerplatte the Germans invade Poland.
5.) 17 Sept the Russians invade Poland.
6.) Russians kill 12,000 Polish military and 10,000 educators, lawyers etc at Katyn and say the Germans did it for the next 60 years.
7.) After WWII at Yalta Poland is thrown to Russia and is a vassal state until 1989.
8.) Russian troops finally leave Poland in 1993.
And you don’t think the Russians won’t try it again. You think the Poles are friends with Russia? Will the US help if Russia takes over?
Sep 20, 2009 - 5:11 am 10. Czar:Like France and England when Germany invaded.
Can’t wait for the macho Putin to show us pictures of him strolling on his steed with his white six pack abs gleaming.
When his boy Obama obeys his demands it makes him so happy,
another child will probably get kissed on the belly..
http://fayebird.blogspot.com/2006/06/putin-kisses-boy-on-stomach-in-public.html
He and Dimitry will celebrate at the St. Petersburg gym and pump each other.
Sep 20, 2009 - 5:16 am 11. Anonymous:Heinlein’s Razor: “Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.”
vs
Occam’s Razor: “When you have two competing theories that make exactly the same predictions, the simpler one is the better.”
With this administration, the simpler theory is malice.
Sep 20, 2009 - 5:31 am 12. Chris in Toronto:Heinlein’s Razor: “Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.”
vs
Occam’s Razor: “When you have two competing theories that make exactly the same predictions, the simpler one is the better.”
With this administration, the simpler theory is malice.
Sep 20, 2009 - 5:35 am 13. patmanshardt.blogspot.com:I hope the administration got something for it. For example, if we obtained concessions from Russia on stopping missile sales to Iran, or for agreement to support Iranian sanctions, it could be argued that this is a defensible move. But I suspect that this is really nothing but unilateral disarmament for its own sake. Hillary Clinton said that dropping the missile defense shield will make us safer. To me it sounds like Neville Chamberlain saying that through the Munich agreement with Hitler, that he accomplished “peace in our time”
One has to wonder if the White House’s decision to announce this move on the 70th anniversary of the day that the USSR invaded Poland is more evidence of their stark incompetence. The only other theory explaining the move on this of all days is that they are just sick.
Sep 20, 2009 - 5:35 am 14. Baloney:Are these staunch allies in Central and Eastern Europe, as well as many other parts of the world the same places that we never hear a peep of gratitude from when we; the United States are busy shelling out blood, money and guts to make certain that they are okay?
Odds are that they are; and frankly instead of them leveling both barrels and letting loose at the United States (as one) when something doesn’t go their way, I think it’s high time that they join the rest of us that are walking around in fear at the same time working our asses off to get rid of the creep(s) on top; plus educate the dysfunctional mental retards that elected them in the first place.
Did I hear Mr. Chrenkoff; who wrote this article say that he is a Conservative along the way?
Good! But, instead of trying to carpet bomb the mouth that never stops in the Whitehouse with how disappointed the rest of the world is in, “We the people of the United States” how about telling them how to identify, target, stand up to and help us take out the real problems; those who elected Obama, Weeper of The House Pelosi and Grimy Harry; plus 3/4ths of the rest of Congress to boot.
Then, if they; the rest of the world have enough energy left to continue bad mouthing “We the People of the United States” I suggest it will be time that we; Americans DEMAND that our elected representatives kick their rear ends out of OUR system!
Sep 20, 2009 - 5:40 am 15. Ed Wallis:#3 wrote, “This article embeds the assumption that Obama believes that what he’s done, by throwing the young democracies of Eastern Europe to the dubious mercies of the Russian bear, somehow advances American interests.”
Don’t see it. At.All.
Anti-American interests, certainly.
A typo, perhaps?
Sep 20, 2009 - 5:57 am 16. eon:Once more, President Obama was simply following the example of his idol and role-model, Jimmy Carter.
Does anyone here remember Carter’s “walk in the woods” with Soviet Premier Leonid Brezhnev in Geneva in 1978? After canceling every major defense program he could (the B-1, the MX missile, the Pershing missile) and cutting back those he didn’t quite dare to cancel (the Los Angeles-class SSNs and Ohio-class SSBNs), Carter then “invited” Brezhnev to “follow his example” in the name of peace.
(While the USSR was in the middle of the biggest military build-up in their history, even bigger than 1942-43; said build-up having started about six seconds after Carter took the Oath of Office.)
Brezhnev’s response was to tell “Jimmy-Earl” that such things should have been negotiated in advance, and that “we are not philanthropists”. In short, since we’d voluntarily given up on defense, especially in NATO, by ourselves, the Russians now had an advantage, and intended to use it. The result was Iran and Afghanistan (Round One- don’t forget, the Ayatollah & Co. were strongly supported by the Kremlin in overthrowing the Shah).
From his more recent writings, statements, etc., Carter still apparently does not understand that negotiating with a totalitarian regime’ with hegemonic ambitions is rather like playing poker with a cardsharp. It’s not a question of “is he going to cheat?”- the question is “which sleeve has the extra ace up it, and which one has the derringer?”
Obama apparently doesn’t “get it” either. Or else, like some of his mentors (Ayres, Wright, etc.) he does- and is hoping to lay the groundwork for a final World Socialist Triumph. Based on his previous track record, I call the odds six-five and pick ‘em as to whether he’s just totally clueless, or driven by a dream of Fabian Socialist absolutism.
Oh, yes. Carter’s famous “initiative” was in the late summer of 1978- the fortieth anniversary of Munich.
“Progressives” do so love “anniversaries”. Even when they don’t admit to it, or are too ignorant of history to realize it.
After all, history doesn’t apply to them, does it?
clear ether
eon
Sep 20, 2009 - 5:58 am 17. vivo:“On the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland? Our staunch allies in Central and Eastern Europe have every right to feel disappointed.”
Suggestions for better timing:
4th of July
Rosh HaShanah
Christmas
5 de Mayo
D-day
V-Day
Mothers Day
11/11 Polish Independence Day
12/12 Russian Constitution Day.
Sep 20, 2009 - 6:02 am 18. whyamInotsurprised?:Same story becoming old now:
Make friends with old enemies of the USA,
Turn back to old friends, even stab them in the back,
Help, praise, even congratulate the Muslim holy day as a good Muslim should …
To bring down the corrupt, imperialistic, menacing, greedy country of America (including idiot liberals whose necks will be sliced just as nicely as any one else’s).
At least Poles and Czechs realize that it is Obama, and not the America people who are turning their backs on them. Barry fools no one.
Sep 20, 2009 - 6:14 am 19. northstar:A everyone thought the Bush administration was unilateral.
Sep 20, 2009 - 6:20 am 20. ~Paules:We won’t know for some time the rationale for this decision because there’s a missing variable in the equation. If we put historical context and personal ideology aside for a moment, we are left to ruminate over factor X. How does the president’s personal psychology play into his decision making? A raging narcissist like Mr. Obama needs no expert advice. I can imagine him consulting himself in the mirror over his morning shave. Who can possibly know by what internal mechanism the president arrives at his decisions? I suppose that in time his advisers will be writing their tell all memoirs. Until then we are left to guess.
Sep 20, 2009 - 6:41 am 21. Marie Claude:“Russia’s relations with its neighbors and former vassals”
all right, the expression is symptomatic on how you see he dilemn, and we could apply it for the US relations with EU
“In any case, the Kremlin made it blatantly clear that no deal to that effect has been made with the Americans and that Obama’s decision to scrap the missile shield was his own initiative”
Rogozin, whose role is to remove any notion of “concession” made to Russia and calling for reciprocity “The drop reported by the United States of a missile shield in Europe should not bring euphoria, said Thursday Dmitry Rogozin, Russian permanent representative to NATO. “We presently hear in the West, including NATO, that this is a huge concession to Russia … But it is above all, those who expect a counterpart that talk of a supposed concession”
er hmm, some non-proliferation of arms treaty is going to be soon on topic !
BTW, did you know that Russia ask to integrate Nato in 1954 when Stalin just passed out ?
and, apparently, like for our eastern EU republics, this has also been her dear dream, already discretly expressed by Gorbatchev some times ago.
Well as resumé, if Obama wanted to give a clear signal of the new US policies, seems that he had hard time to express them, as he wanted to spare the goat and the cabbage, not getting in trouble with the US arms manufacturers by not saying that the BMDE dream for Poland and the Czechs are completely over, and therefore giving an open message to Russia, that could be trusted. Again, every parties stand on its positions : expectation !
Sep 20, 2009 - 6:45 am 22. Sebastian Shaw:The irony will get lost in the incompetent Obama Administration.
Sep 20, 2009 - 7:03 am 23. vb:Obama is treating Poland just like he treats those middle Americans who cling to religion and guns–with contemptible condescension. I might add American blacks to that list; just think of Jesse Jackson’s comments when he thought the mike was off. He is a man of grand theories and no principles, which he tries to disguise as pragmatism. One would assume that there are Americans who could give him some advice, but he doesn’t need that. I can’t wait to see what Anne Applebaum will have to say about all this.
Sep 20, 2009 - 7:10 am 24. jharp:Honestly, I’d like to see PM get something right just once. The commie leftist George Bush Defense Secretary Robert Gates and all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff agreed that a shift in America’s missile-defense plans made sense.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/20/opinion/20gates.html?_r=1&ref=opinion
What is it with you guys? You all need to take a long look in the mirror and ask yourself just what in the hell you are trying to accomplish. Serial lying is not a virtue.
Sep 20, 2009 - 7:11 am 25. ehunter:Our staunch allies in Central Europe eh?
Sep 20, 2009 - 7:15 am 26. Wolla Dalbo:Really? How many Czechs and Poles stood by
us in Iraq and Afghanistan? What is the ratio
between what these people spend on beer and sausage
compared to what they have committed to fight
terrorism? Hmm?
Others posting here have touched on the idea I have posted on elsewhere, that many of us are incapable of offering the absolutely imperative, the necessary, correct and highly forceful opposition to Obama & Co. because we are viewing their actions using the old, traditional and, up until now, useful “template” of the expected—of Presidents who are deeply immersed in and love America and its ways, its History and Values, its people and the Constitution—a template that gives great latitude for the normal stupidity, arrogance and incoherence, but which does not take into account or recognize hatred, malice or deliberate sabotage.
If we use the old tried and true template, Obama & Co.’s actions seem ill considered, chaotic and ineffective, indeed, counterproductive.
However, if we use a new and unusual template, one that most of the world has used almost all of the time, but that we have been extraordinarily fortunate not to have needed up until now, if we use the “template” of Tyranny and Dictatorship, of Destruction and Sabotage, if we assume that Obama & Co. seek, not to heal and renew, but to destroy our Democracy, our Freedoms, the Constitution, and to “smash the capitalist system,” and remake America along Marxist/Facist/Statist lines why, then, all of their actions make much more and ominous sense.
Until enough of us use this new template and see and accept the result, we will not generate the fiercely determined kind and level of resistance that is necessary if we as a country are to survive as a reasonably intact, functioning and free Democracy.
Sep 20, 2009 - 7:35 am 27. Valerie:Is THAT why the dollar slid so hard against the pound that day?
Sep 20, 2009 - 7:49 am 28. Donna V.:Are these staunch allies in Central and Eastern Europe, as well as many other parts of the world the same places that we never hear a peep of gratitude from when we; the United States are busy shelling out blood, money and guts to make certain that they are okay?
It might be helpful to actually know something before you start typing baloney, “Baloney.” Polish troops have fought alongside US ones in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Czech ex-President Havel is a staunch anti-Communist (he was imprisoned by the Communists for years) and a true friend of the US and capitalism. Poland and the Czech Republic are in fact two of the most pro-American spots on the planet.
And of course, Obama foreign policy dictates that we kick our friends and allies in the teeth while sucking up and apologizing to our enemies.
The second Carter adminstration? No, Obambi is going to make Jimmah’s horrible first term look like a golden age.
Sep 20, 2009 - 8:03 am 29. Anonymous:“I have been following, and for a while, working on various ‘Star Wars’ tech since Ronald Reagan dreamed it up, way back in the 1980’s.
Abandoning something that doesn’t work, and has little chance of performing as advertised hardly qualifies as a bad decision. You are all entitled to your political opinions, but as a matter of fact, you’d better get a different soapbox to support your contention that we’re pulling working tech out of a place where it’s already doing an effective job. That’s bullshit by the ignorant.”
You claim to be knowledgable about these programs and yet you don’t supply a single specific claim to back up your claim that these programs don’t work. I dare you to do so and I can’t wait to see what you leave out as well.
We’ll see who’s lying here.
Sep 20, 2009 - 8:05 am 30. Nobama 2012:14. Baloney:
Weeper of the House- Nancy Pelosi..
I love reading stuff at PJM-
That comment
‘Weeper of the House’
will be in my brain and comments for months.
lol..
Nancy-
They shall shall spill Political Blood!
Yeah..
Congressional Leeches.
Sep 20, 2009 - 8:07 am 31. turfmonster:I’m the poster in #29.
Sep 20, 2009 - 8:14 am 32. turfmonster:And I’m calling fauxscot in #8 out.
Let’s see you back your charge up that SDI isn’t going to work, pal.
Sep 20, 2009 - 8:18 am 33. Nobama 2012:I have looked at both sides of this argument and personally think Putin is dumb for not allowing his man to put up this missile defense shield.
We caused the Soviet Union to go broke trying to keep up with our technology,
Remember Reagan’s speech-
Mr. Gorbachev,
take down that wall!
Why not let Bambie go another 4 trillion in debt trying to protect all of Europe?
The only wall we have to come down has never been finished.
Sep 20, 2009 - 8:32 am 34. Libertyship46:The argument that the Obama administration is ditching the long-range missile shield for Central Europe so that a quicker missile shield that can shoot down short and medium-range missiles is a bogus one. Why does it have to be an “either/or” proposition? If Obama really, really, wanted to send a message of strength to the Russians (or, for that matter, to the Iranians), he would have kept the long-range missile shield AND deployed the defenses for both short and medium-range missiles. Imagine the signal that would have sent to America’s enemies. We would be deploying various types of missile shields to deter any missile threat, from long-range to short-range missiles. But no, we get some sort of Pentagon-speak from Gates saying that we really don’t need to perfect this long-range missile defense shield when we can use something else that MAY work just as well. That’s a pretty big May that he’s using. In any case, how does he know that the long-range shield won’t work? Critics of the short and long range missile defenses said the same thing back in the 1980s. But, with further funding and testing, those missiles now can offer a very credible defense against short- and medium-ranged missiles. No, Obama did this to try and cut a deal with the Russians and he will be horribly disappointed. He is a weak and, worse, naive, president who will lead this country to disaster. Evidently, the democrats didn’t learn anything from Jimmy Carter.
Sep 20, 2009 - 8:41 am 35. misanthopicus:America and her allies have been taken to the laundry by Obama, but Obama himself was double tricked by the Russians in this matter. The premises of this situation are the following: while Russia was clear that there in no quid-pro-quo in this deal, Obama needed something to peddle at the UN gathering, and part of that PR package was/is the hypothetical notion that Russia still will do something about Iran.
Yet this double Potemkiniade contains two intrinsic, conflicting forces:
1) Obama is aware that he needs to add more and more credits for his metamorphosis from a US president in a completely international authority figure (not little reason being here the fact that the birth certificate affair will catch up with him), and the Russian deal was designed to serve him in this direction –
2) yet his claims at stimulating the Russians to restrain Iran will be not confirmed by reality, because,
a) Russia has no interest whatsoever to promote or protect the geopolitical interests of the US in any form, and:
b) even if they would try to do something in this direction (which again, will be just some going through the motions), their leverage upon Iran is limited and not seen as worth to be vasted on supporting the US (yes, Obama is delusional if he thinks that Putin’s group worry about his future career – no, they don’t).
So, this gross farce that Obama presidency is, which was opened by the “we’re the hope we’ve been waiting for” crowd, then amplified by some idiotic Europeans, is beginning to fizzle, regardless media’s swooning over Obama’s being the savior – hopefully this situation will close without reaching the point in which Israel will be forced to strike Iran.
Sep 20, 2009 - 8:58 am 36. Pragmatist:Vivo the moron just proves how moronic he is.
Sep 20, 2009 - 9:04 am 37. carla:VIVO
I would have chosen your birthday. Symmetry, Two abortins on the same day.
Sep 20, 2009 - 9:56 am 38. misanthropicus:RE#25/ehunter: [...] Our staunch allies in Central Europe eh? Really? How many Czechs and Poles stood by
us in Iraq and Afghanistan? [...]
ehunter, there is some truth in what you say, yet I woudn’t go that harsh on E. Europeans – remember, it’s parasites like France, Spain and Scandinavia that florished without making any effort under America’s umbrella for fifty years (actually France relentlessly trying to sabotage America’s efforts to keep NATO and Europe united), who don’t make any effort in this direction.
As direct military effort, much the East European nations cannot contribute to our actions in the world – however, even in smaller environments they are quite useful, maintaining the local military safety, and very important, being willing “provocation” targets for Russia, that is accepting to be trip-wires for larger potential conflicts (and considering the history of E. Europe, the idea of accepting to be a conflagration trip-wire requires some fortitude, I tell you.)
The fact is that the Eastern European states have proved themselves useful for the larger (and positive) world policies of America (yes, terrorism fight as well, look at the flack they take for facilitating the extraterritorial rendition actions – hope you are not Eric Holder or Barney Frank), and they are also, in the planet’s anti-American cacophony, firm supporters of this country – not little thing, I’d say, when you look at the hostility most UN members harbor towards us.
Then – how is the liberals’ notion: “We are not liked!”
Well – Obama’s action shows that being liked is not a paramount concern for him or Frank Rich.
Anyway, no matter how you look at Obama’s decision – idiocy, bad timing, personal interest PR action, naivite, you name them, it is unavoidable, if you’re in good faith, to reach the conclusion that… this decision will have negative and costly consequences in the future. Period.
Sep 20, 2009 - 10:29 am 39. EasyEight:I believe this action by Obama must be viewed more in the domestic political sense than the international political sense. For Obama, everything is political, and politics is local — this is more about rewarding his leftist political base than anything else. To them, “Star Wars” is a legacy of Ronald Reagan, and must be stopped. They’ve always been against it, have always been wedded to MAD (but not really, more an excuse to inaction), and see missile defenses as destabilizing and provocative.
The left has been increasingly angry with Obama over his inability to deliver on nationalized healthcare and the cancellation of Reagan’s Star Wars is a nice little bone to toss them to keep ‘em in line.
He did the same with the Unions recently, slapping tarrifs on Chinese tires and risking a trade war just to throw the Unions a bone and keep ‘em happy.
Remember. All politics is local with this president, you don’t have to contort yourself with traditional analysis of foreign policy goals.
Sep 20, 2009 - 10:32 am 40. Kate Rafferty:#24–Serial lying is not a virtue.
It’s a feature.
Sep 20, 2009 - 11:03 am 41. Poor Citizen:Apalling Timing I agree !!!
What time did he do it anyway?
Hey, that Max Baucus version of so called health care… looks like a “sellout” to me. Big insurance must have paid him big time for that one. Peace out.
Sep 20, 2009 - 11:04 am 42. Marie Claude:– remember, it’s parasites like France, Spain and Scandinavia that florished without making any effort under America’s umbrella for fifty years (actually France relentlessly trying to sabotage America’s efforts to keep NATO and Europe united), who don’t make any effort in this direction.
aw come on ? you’re not serious !
France wasn’t under your umbrella, remember 1967 “US go home, US go home…” De Gaulle thought we had no need of a 2nd occupation after Germany’s, and you went back home !
Thanks God we are trying to remain the sane people in Europe (uh, some others are waking up nowadays too !), we don’t need your interferrence in our countries, that only brought us mess and discordes
Just keep the good job in your borders, you have so much work to look after your communities
Sep 20, 2009 - 11:11 am 43. Marie Claude:ecco,
Misanthropicus, is your nick only directed at us ?
Sep 20, 2009 - 11:18 am 44. misanthropicus:RE #42, 43/Marie Claude Re #38 [...] it’s parasites like France, Spain and Scandinavia that florished without making any effort under America’s umbrella for fifty years (actually France relentlessly trying to sabotage America’s efforts to keep NATO and Europe united) [...]
… systematically trying over the heads of everybody to associate themselves with Brejnez, oppossing in any manner the rightful unification of Germany…
Sep 20, 2009 - 12:43 pm 45. Donna V.:we don’t need your interferrence in our countries, that only brought us mess and discordes
Once again, Marie Claude drops a load of merde.
The “mess and discordes” of WWI and WWII were caused by America? We cleaned up YOUR messes, Marie Claude.
If France was invaded and occupied again, I wouldn’t shed one tear. It’s unfortunate though, that the brave people of Eastern Europe, who suffered greatly from both the Nazis and the Soviets, are once again tossed to the wolves.
Sep 20, 2009 - 12:44 pm 46. Mike:To Marie Claude (aka dumba**):
“France wasn’t under your umbrella, remember 1967 “US go home, US go home…” De Gaulle thought we had no need of a 2nd occupation after Germany’s, and you went back home!”
Just remember Marie, “Sprechen Sie Deutsch” had we not saved your bacon in WWII. Sometime go to the US military graveyards in France and look around. I would do the same here in the US but there are none. Other than 200+ yrs ago, France has not helped us.
I know it is hard for you to understand this but try- Had the USSR invaded France during the time you are talking about, would the US have stood by or would we have engaged the Russians? So it was easy for DeGaulle to act independently and still know the US would not let France be attacked. So you have presented a straw man argument.
As for me, I think the EU has grown fat, dumb and happy under our defense umbrella for the past 65 yrs. If it was up to me, I would let the EU deal with its defense itself. But then we both know that is not going to happen so we taxpayers will continue to provide an umbrella for dumba** like you.
Heinlein’s Razor: “Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.”
Sep 20, 2009 - 12:47 pm 47. McBride:vs
Occam’s Razor: “When you have two competing theories that make exactly the same predictions, the simpler one is the better.”
If history has shown Poland anything they definately need to develope tactical nukes.They can’t trust the current U.S. administration or the rest of Europe.
Marie Claude,it most assuredly was the U.S. strategic forces umbrella that kept all of Europe from going to hell in their own cheerful fashion.It was American strength that kept the Russians on the other side of the Elbe,not Pierre’s puissance or joie de vie and not John Bull’s lousy cuisine and stiff upper lip.
Sep 20, 2009 - 1:01 pm 48. Marie Claude:… systematically trying over the heads of everybody to associate themselves with Brejnez, oppossing in any manner the rightful unification of Germany…
who ? Mitterrand ? he is the one that reducted the communists influence, from 20%, they dropped to – 10% and in the last election about 1,5 %
about Germany rightful reunification, you don’t know it, but that was Thatcher fear too !
Sep 20, 2009 - 1:26 pm 49. Marie Claude:Donna, Mike, will you ever one day not consider that you weren’t the alone fighter in WW1 and WW2 ?
and yes, US policies in EU were ment to keep the EU nations under control, a strong EU was a threat to american economical (and political)hegemony,
and that there are British, Canadian, muslim, french fighters cimetaries in lots of our regions too, but that you’ll never quote or visit !
McBride, thanks for your humor, of course you have the argument, but it is more nicely expressed
Sep 20, 2009 - 1:36 pm 50. Anonymous:Donna, Mike, will you ever one day not consider that you weren’t the alone fighter in WW1 and WW2 ?
Uh, we did a hell of a lot more fighting in WWII than the French did. Of course, they all became “maquis d’apres-guerres” after Germany surrendered: resistance fighter, post-war.”
And when did I claim we were the only ones fighting in WWII?
Marie Claude, for someone from the land of Decartes, you couldn’t think your way out of a wet paper bag.
Sep 20, 2009 - 2:06 pm 51. Donna V.:Donna, Mike, will you ever one day not consider that you weren’t the alone fighter in WW1 and WW2 ?
Marie Claude, when did I ever say that we were? We did much more fighting in WWII than the French did, although once Germany surrendered, many Frenchmen magically became maquis d’apres-guerre: resistance fighter, post-war.
Sep 20, 2009 - 2:26 pm 52. misanthropicus:RE #49/Marie Claude: [...] Donna, Mike, will you ever one day not consider that you weren’t the alone fighter in WW1 and WW2 ? [...]
Definitely there were many countries that fought the WWII on the right, America-championed side, and their apport to that cause varied, as the circumstances wished, and all their contributions must be acknowledged and saluted – yet, not even the most powerful microscope can bring among them (say, Norway, Greece or New Zealand), Fance as anything else but a study in cowardice and hypocrisy, then later as a superb illustration of ingratitude and poisonous duplicity.
There were more Senegalese and Poles than French in the troops that freed Paris – and eat this, Marie-Claude -
Sep 20, 2009 - 3:21 pm 53. Donna V.:Oops, that “anonymous” comment is mine. I thought my post didn’t go through, so I wrote it again.
Hard to tell on PJM whether your comment has been accepted or deleted or is being “held for moderation” – for 4 hours.
Sep 20, 2009 - 3:39 pm 54. Marie Claude:Donna
We did much more fighting in WWII than the French did
from which date ? say june 1944
you forgot that we couldn’t raise an army in our occupied territory !
you forgot may 1940, 100 thousands French died for that english troops could rejoin Brittain !
you forgot the many resistants that were tortured, that where shotted… and all the underground resistance, assistance, renseignements estimated about 500 000, and that without them no possible glorious Dday for your troops, besides Eisenhower honnored them, saying that they represented more than 20 divisions (check the right number)
you forgot Leclerc forces that fought through Chad and rejoined Mongomerry in Lybia, al right senegalais, but not only !
and yes my dear Alceste, the muslim troops engaged with the French in Algeria that fought through Algeria and Tunisia, that freed Italy and France from the south (not in Normandy)
Fance (?) as anything else but a study in cowardice and hypocrisy, then later as a superb illustration of ingratitude and poisonous duplicity.
So we are right not to trust you and rever your highness ? LMAO
your words are so full of your arrogant pedantism, you’re not a soldier but a paper monger !
BTW, forget to quote our litterature that you like to show off at times
Sep 20, 2009 - 3:50 pm 55. Marie Claude:Some Poles were fightin along in may 1940, and then with British, especially RAF guis were famous
None said they weren’t courageous !
Though they weren’t with Leclerc troops that entered into Paris !
Sep 20, 2009 - 4:05 pm 56. George S.:MC ..it wasn’t just the US troops that were kicked-out of France. I think it was a political move.
secondly it wasn’t an occupying force, it was NATO and there to help the nuetralize and potential threat.
having NATO troops leave is understandable ….kicking them out they way they were was rude and ingracious.
regards
Sep 20, 2009 - 4:12 pm 57. Marie Claude:À la fin 1945, les différents corps d’armée français et les résistants de l’intérieur sont rassemblés dans une 1ère Armée française sous le commandement du général Jean de Lattre de Tassigny. Sur un total de 550.000 hommes, on compte alors 134.000 Algériens, 73.000 Marocains, 26.000 Tunisiens et 92.000 ressortissants d’Afrique noire.
Sep 20, 2009 - 4:30 pm 58. Marie Claude:George S this was De Gaulle relations with the Americans, more on the misanthropic kind !
But the fact that you left, made that we had to help ourselves, so we did, we are an independant country, that has no need to bow to any master, especially in these topic energy times
Of course your guis weren’t all bad !
Sep 20, 2009 - 5:01 pm 59. Donna V.:from which date ? say june 1944
You forgot about North Africa and the Sicily campaign! You forgot we were also fighting Japan! Or does only the fighting in France matter to you?
you forgot that we couldn’t raise an army in our occupied territory !
You forgot that you were occupied because you shamefully surrendered without putting up much of a fight!
you forgot the many resistants that were tortured, that where shotted…
I don’t forget them – all the brave men and women of France were killed by the Nazis. Some of them were betrayed by their own countrymen.
See, you forgot a little thing called “Vichy France!” You forgot to mention that unpleasant word “collaborators.” For every Frenchman who headed off into the woods with a rifle, there were others who were happy to assist the Germans.
You accuse me of “forgetting” but it’s you with the highly selective memory.
Sep 20, 2009 - 5:24 pm 60. Politics for dummies:3 Francis”
What you said in so many words permit me to say in a perfect ten.
We’ve got a full blown Communist in the White House.
Sep 20, 2009 - 5:58 pm 61. Kathy:Et Marie Claude, sans les Americaines, votre resistance pathetique sont perdu avec toute la France. C’est vrai, n’est pas?
Other than that, Ms. Marie Claude Lincoln, how was the play?
I stink at French grammar, but I’ll bet you get the drift. My french spelling is better than your English.
How do those numbers of resistence stack up to American DEAD on French shores? Do you know those numbers?
The fact that you demonstrate your indifference to our historical national sacrifice on behalf of your country inclines us to disregard your grasp of international politics. Shame on you.
Sep 20, 2009 - 7:02 pm 62. Kathy:And since my last comment was painfully off topic – sorry – for the record Obama’s decision on the missile shield is no surprise. Democrats do not protect anyone except themselves, they have no loyalty outside our borders or inside our borders except to venues to retain power. They have no country, and that’s why Honduras trying to preserve democracy, Poland striving to maintain democracy, Israel the only true democracy in the region except for Iraq (which Obama is also trying to lose), all fall in the disposal. Democracy for it’s own sake is not the objective of the modern left. Obviously. Democrats should change their name.
What did Obama get for this embarrassment? Embarrassment. Either that was his objective (which I believe) or he’s an idiot.
He is successful. The USA is embarrassed. But we can fix that in 2012 and we will.
Sep 20, 2009 - 7:10 pm 63. Paul of Alexandria:It’s “rogue” state. Russia is a “rouge” state.
Sep 20, 2009 - 7:40 pm 64. Pragmatist:Oh and just in case you think I made the previous post up here is a Transcript of the OBAMINATIOn LYING as usual to ABC. Comments in the brackets are mine.
“ABC Presenter:- It was one of the most popular topics among the questions you submitted to me for my interview with President Obama – the controversy involving ACORN.
While the President said that ACORN “deserves to be investigated” in light of the “inappropriate” video that’s gone viral, he did not endorse recent votes in Congress to cut off federal funding for the community group.
Here’s our FULL exchange:
STEPHANOPOULOS: How about the funding for ACORN?
OBAMA: You know, if — frankly, it’s not really something I’ve followed closely (LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE). I didn’t even know that ACORN was getting a whole lot of federal money.(TOTAL UNADULTERATED BLANTANT LYING)
STEPHANOPOULOS: Both the Senate and the House have voted to cut it off.
OBAMA: You know, what I know is, is that what I saw on that video was certainly inappropriate and deserves to be investigated.
STEPHANOPOULOS: So you’re not committing to — to cut off the federal funding?
OBAMA: George, this is not the biggest issue facing the country. It’s not something I’m paying a lot of attention to.”
http://www.weaselzippers.net/blog/2009/09/shocker-obama-wont-commit-to-cutting-federal-funding-for-acorn-.html
Sep 20, 2009 - 7:44 pm 65. Paul of Alexandria:alex (2):
Yes, it’s off the drawing board, and yes it works. The system to be deployed in Poland was a 2-stage variation of the US BMD System, which has been successfully tested numerous times.
Sep 20, 2009 - 7:49 pm 66. Paul of Alexandria:Matthew (6):
Iran can threaten Europe too – or have you forgotten the various terrorist attacks there recently.
In any case, there are two issues here:
The first is the issue of missile defense itself. The system in question was intended to protect US allies against middle-east ICBM’s; this capability is now seriously compromised, if not totally nullified. Obama’s proposed system, based on naval SM-3 missiles, do not have the range of the BMD system missiles.
The second is the keeping of long-standing promises to those US allies. This issue is only secondarily about Iranian ICBM’s and primarily about providing a counterweight to Russian hegemony (if not actual conquest) in the region. Those missile and radar bases would be guarded by US/NATO troops, which would provide a dis-incentive for Russia to pull the same thing there as it did in Georgia.
The long-term political consequences of this action will be much worse than merely lack of protection against ICBM’s.
Sep 20, 2009 - 7:55 pm 67. Paul of Alexandria:turfmonster (32):
Ballistic Missile Defense Flight Test Record
Yep, seems to be coming along quite nicely. This failure rate is typical of a system still in the test phase; note that all but one of the failures in the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system – the one that is deployed in Alaska and a variant of which would have been deployed in Europe – were due to causes other than the kinetic-kill vehicle. (We know how to build rocket boosters – I’ve heard that these failures were basically due to cost-cutting in the test procedures; we bought cheap test boosters that were supposed to be known to work).
Sep 20, 2009 - 8:06 pm 68. Marie Claude:Mesdames, merci de me faire savoir encore une fois la grandeur et la generosité de nos amis americains, mais le répéter tous les jours finit par nous lasser
and Donna you’re new, cuz it’s not one week (sometimes not a day)that some of your well intentionned fellahs put Vichy ahead ! then I recall you that your isolationist government was trading with it, until when again ? you surely forgot the date !
Cependant Though, in this remnent panegyric of the american generosity, sometimes I have to point out that they were not alone, especially when some, let’s say ignorant” persons, deny us any good will to fight
Sep 20, 2009 - 8:16 pm 69. Donna V.:The frightening thing is what a shambles he and Congress might be able to make of our country by the time 2012 rolls around. Not to mention the danger he is putting us all in with his feckless foreign policy.
Like another PJM poster said a few weeks ago, every day is a “WTF??” day when it comes to Obama.
Sep 20, 2009 - 8:20 pm 70. Pragmatist:OBAMA = ACORN, ACORN = OBAMA you cannot put a cigarette paper between them.
Sep 20, 2009 - 8:42 pm 71. Harrison:Aside from that, Mrs. Lincoln, what did you think of the play?
Sep 20, 2009 - 9:30 pm 72. Robohobo:Elsewhere I read that if you plot the ballistic trajectories from Iran to the US, they go right over………….(wait for it) Poland and Czechoslovakia. Check Google Earth and you can see it. Ain’t that interesting? Also, someone made the point that those radars could see deep into Russia and that the “Motherland” might be a tad touchy about that. I can see that.
The other thing that so many miss is that we reneged on a commitment to an ally. Plain and simple, we sold them down the river. And without much warning as far as I could tell.
Sep 20, 2009 - 10:15 pm 73. Pragmatist:We hear all these claims from the ‘libtards’ about the brilliance of the Obamanation but ask them to show you proof like his school and College grades or even ONE college or Law Society paper and all of a sudden they shut up. Why because the Obamanation has HIDDEN them all.
Sep 21, 2009 - 12:16 am 74. Matthew:Pragmatist:
You’ve got some evidence to back that up? And how is it relevant?
Paul of Alexandria:
“Iran can threaten Europe too – or have you forgotten the various terrorist attacks there recently”
They’re not threatening europe with missiles.
“The first is the issue of missile defense itself. The system in question was intended to protect US allies against middle-east ICBM’s”
There aren’t any middle-eastern ICBMs. Iran can reach western europe and that’s about it. We’ve discussed that already. When iran CAN reach the US then they’ll find themselves being a retaliation target, and that’ll be that (I wonder if you get a certificate or something when you’re in the cross-hairs, just so you know?)
“this capability is now seriously compromised, if not totally nullified”
The system they’re removing doesn’t work. It’s pre-nullified.
“The second is the keeping of long-standing promises to those US allies … which would provide a dis-incentive for Russia to pull the same thing there as it did in Georgia.”
Then stick a marine barracks in poland and be done with it. The trick is – you want to make sure you aren’t walking face-first into trouble – NATO’s decision NOT to back georgia until it sorted out its border issues being a case in point.
“The long-term political consequences of this action will be much worse than merely lack of protection against ICBM’s”
Nah. I reckon this whole thing was a watered-down version of krushchev’s cuban missiles. Stick something worrying on your enemy’s border so you can bargain. Trouble is – bush was in no domestic position to bargain.
Sep 21, 2009 - 1:24 am 75. Rachel Peepers:Appalling timing?
Arthur, I need you to read my compilations entitled “Politics for Dummies.” The timing of Barack’s shaded red missile surrender was no mistake. He was just following orders.
Be that as it may. I got super news.
Here’s what I’ve been waiting for folks. All the money that my creative group used to sink the USS Kerry in July ‘04 for Adm. Paul Hoffman and the rest of the Swift Boat Guys for Truth, has been wired to a special account for use by.
Lil’ ole blue eyed Rachel. ME.
This is great news folks, and proof that Rachel resonated with a lot of the right people.
This means videos on Hannity. Spots on Fox. Cutting up Barack on Utube and websites all over independent America; pointing out why Obama is just too Unamerican for comfort. It’s all gonna get done.
Maybe even a little heart to heart with scum like Michael Moore, Letterman and little Katie suggesting they be a little more fair minded is in the offing.
I’m so happy I could spit. We’re gonna get our country back.
Sep 21, 2009 - 1:40 am 76. another Chuck:Now we know O’s motive for scrapping the missiles:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/20/barack-obama-us-nuclear-weapons
The fool is after unilateral nuclear disarmament, another one of his ecstatic visions.
Sep 21, 2009 - 4:08 am 77. George S.:58. Marie Claude:
you missed my point entirely. no worries maybe a language thing.
France was/is about having the cake and eating it too. De Gaulle was not good for anyone.
incidently I am not american.
the americans retreating on the missle defence is very bad news for any nation that would support US policy. they have been shown again that when push comes to shove the americans will not be there. …it isn’t about the missle shield, it is about respect and commitment.
Sep 21, 2009 - 5:21 am 78. Marie Claude:George S
I don’t think so, you said it was a political move, though I insisted more on De Gaulle’s relations with the Americans, in fact de Gaulle surfed on the wave and found it convenient : communists were complaining of “Americans occupation”, saying they were abusive and not respectful of the french citizen, which was the case for some persons that believed they were in a vainqued country, or kind of colony where French had no more value than the “negroes” for colonials
I don’t think De Gaulle was bad for us, he cared of us more than anyone else, of course, he went against external pressions hat wanted to make us forget who we were !
Respect and commitment ?
hmm, I hardly could find any on the american side during the past decade, except, deamonization of the countries that didn’t follow blindly Bush unipolar policies.
Sep 21, 2009 - 6:55 am 79. George S.:M C …I can see where you are coming from. and if you look at issues with a narrow focus I would agree with a lot of your reply.. …so I do think you have missed much of my intent.
De Gaulle was a narcissist like the present US president. they are only good for themselves and any good they do is collateral and accidental.
the respect and commitment remark was in referrence of how the US has betrayed it’s allies past present and I have no doubt future too ..it wasn’t just a remark about the US / French relationship.
the US has a long history of having a very short attention horizon. I do think they have generally meant to do well but given that they don’t have the staying power they often do harm. sort of cut and run when domestic politics gets in the equation.
Sep 21, 2009 - 7:23 am 80. misanthropicus:RE#78/Marie Claude: [...] hmm, I hardly could find any on the american side during the past decade, except, deamonization of the countries that didn’t follow blindly Bush unipolar policies. [...]
… the alternative for Bush unipolar policies in Res Iraq in the post 9/11 world… being? More UN resolutions? It took two years for the invasion to commence -
Sep 21, 2009 - 8:11 am 81. Zer0:So, it’s the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland. So *&*#ing what? Any given time is bound to be the XXth anniversary of something. I could give a crap about hurting Polish feelings about something that happened 70 years ago.
The only important factor in making this decision is whether it will improve American national security. It was never going to protect Poland against a barrage of Russian missiles, it’s not in the specs. The only practical use for this system is to defend against missiles fired against us or our allies from rogue states. If the changes will help with that mission then great, if not we shouldn’t have done it. I’m not an expert on ballistic missiles so I’ll leave that decision to the DoD.
Sep 21, 2009 - 8:36 am 82. Paul of Alexandria:Matthew (74):
…
“They’re not threatening europe with missiles.”
Yet. I’d rather prefer that they not be able to.
Sep 21, 2009 - 8:45 am 83. Paul of Alexandria:Robohobo (72)
Sep 21, 2009 - 8:47 am 84. Mike Murray:That’s it in a nutshell!
Teddy Roosevelt understood the foreign policy implications of the West African proverb: “Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far.”
It is clear that Barack Obama does not. Oh, he speaks softly (i.e. apologetically) all right. But he carries no stick at all.
Sep 21, 2009 - 8:50 am 85. tanstaafl:Only beginning ?
President Barack Obama is beginning to look out of his depth
Sep 21, 2009 - 8:58 am 86. Jim Rockford:Was there ever a question whether or not Obama would scrap the missile defense shield over Eastern Europe? Even though his exact words in April were “The Czech Republic and Poland have been courageous in agreeing to host a defense against these missiles,” he declared. “As long as the threat from Iran persists, we will go forward with a missile-defense system that is cost-effective and proven.”
It became obvious during the campaign that Obama was and is a left-wing radical whose foreign policy would consist of pandering to our enemies and unilaterally disarming the United States. And he’s doing it. He’s stopped production of the worlds best fighter, the F-22 Raptor. He’s putting the stops to our missile defense efforts, in Europe and here at home. And these are only the most visible cuts. The military’s future is death by 1000 cuts. It will be worse than under Carter when Navy ships could not get underway for lack of crew.
Sep 21, 2009 - 9:30 am 87. misanthropicus:RE #81/Zer0: [...] I could give a crap about hurting Polish feelings about something that happened 70 years ago. [...]
1) Zero, with the risk of hurting your feelings, I have to inform you that what happened 70 years ago “there” can return anytime, in a much much worse for if the USA doesn’t act wisely – and it would be very costly, my worthy man -
2) “[...] The only important factor in making this decision is whether it will improve American national security. It was never going to protect Poland against a barrage of Russian missiles, it’s not in the specs. [...]”
Zero, “Si vis pacem, parabellum”, buddy – if you place your actionable missiles system in Kansas and not in Poland (or other intercepting points), you are slighly behind the curve, ain’t you?
3) [...] I’m not an expert on ballistic missiles so I’ll leave that decision to the DoD. [...]
Bingo! and explain why suddenly something that was considered by DOD a good plan, suddenly became unnecessary. Robert Gates dodging about the “new perceptions” thing makes you think that the DOD is THAT comfortable with this decision? Then the other explanation, “basically it’s a matter of money, so …”
And a last sprinkle on this – is the presence of known leftist, bent on bringing this country on the lines of a self-defeating internationalism (i.e. Obama) of no consequence in this decision?
4) [...] The only important factor in making this decision is whether it will improve American national security [...] – or, translated in vernacular: “where is the beef?”
“There is no beef for you, Zero,” Medeedev said -
Sep 21, 2009 - 9:57 am 88. Marie Claude:De Gaulle was a narcissist like the present US president. they are only good for themselves and any good they do is collateral and accidental.
I don’t know from country origin you are, but you misunderstood De Gaulle’s personnality.
He was kindy some kind of medieval knight for France, with the sense of honnor and modesty. He never went in front of cameras to promote himself, but to explain his policies and decisions. He never benefitted of its position to get advantages : he paid all his private expenses from his own wages as a military retired. Besides he was an achieved man of litterature, his writings are hold as of the best in french litterature (ie Chateaubriand spirit), also he knew perfectly our history, his father was a teacher of history in Catholic university, and himself was giving courses of military history in St Cyr, which is hold as the highest degree for a military career. He reformed all our social infrastructures and gave us the Vth constitution, which is so far the best way to manage France diversities in politic spectral, that Churchill once said it was impossible to manage (cuz of so many cheezes and wines, aka so many different regions with their style and (former) dialects.
During his mendate, De Gaulle was critisized by the lefties, nowadays they say it’s one of the best political personnalities that France produced.
the respect and commitment remark was in referrence of how the US has betrayed it’s allies past present and I have no doubt future too ..it wasn’t just a remark about the US / French relationship.
Well, US watches for their INTERESTS, as an aware country in policies, one of the best since our Revolution, we knew and still see it working every day ! only naives would still believe that the US act for their good sakes, Russians, Poles were/are experiencing it !
BTW, seems that the Poles finally understood where their interest stand, the joined France and Germany in the farmers strike for milk prices !
the US has a long history of having a very short attention horizon. I do think they have generally meant to do well but given that they don’t have the staying power they often do harm. sort of cut and run when domestic politics gets in the equation
The US have the “anglo-saxons” spirit of managing, they priviledge the short term, while we construct for centenaries !
Sep 21, 2009 - 10:41 am 89. Marie Claude:#80, I don’ expect that you share our perspective, but you’re a good image of what we were disgusted for !
Sep 21, 2009 - 10:52 am 90. George S.:MC
I respectfully disagree with your assessment of De Gaulle.
The americans should put their countries interests first …that is natural and expected. but they like to think they are more then just another country. and in many ways they are. unfortunately they do not follow through and with every change in government there is a new policy and treatment of the rest of the world. This has made them somewhat unreliable as a long term partner and the present administration is taking the unreliablity factor to new levels.
regards
Sep 21, 2009 - 12:32 pm 91. Marie Claude:yeah, I expected that you disagreed on de De gaulle, LMAO he was just too Franks protectionnist !
Sep 21, 2009 - 1:05 pm 92. myth buster:Don’t be so misconducted, the US have always cared for their own interesrests, making business with the global world was part of his elites !the perfid face of the good sentiments, but aren’t the US population not paying it nowadays, I heard that unemployment was growing, and that wages were lowering !
You know, we should have stopped caring what Western Europe thought twenty years ago. The whole lot of them are ungrateful, save perhaps for those who lived through WWII, and possibly England. Poland and Georgia are far more deserving of our goodwill than France and Germany are, and it’s long past time for us to start acting like it.
Sep 21, 2009 - 1:11 pm 93. Marie claude:mytho, sorry to disppoint you the Poles just re-joined the EU, and are striking with the French and the Germans for the milk prices, isn’t it symptomatic of what the VERY populations are aimin for ? and not following the nomenklaturara dream of american supports !
Sep 21, 2009 - 1:38 pm 94. Funnel:75. Rachel Peepers:
“Here’s what I’ve been waiting for folks. All the money that my creative group used to sink the USS Kerry in July ‘04 for Adm. Paul Hoffman and the rest of the Swift Boat Guys for Truth, has been wired to a special account for use by.
Lil’ ole blue eyed Rachel. ME.”
The little whore is getting paid?
Sep 21, 2009 - 1:57 pm 95. Marie Claude:my friends, “conservatives” ? you’re living in a worn out world, but you’re not trying to open your eyes !
you even can’t acknowledge who are you true ennemies !
we never were, but we had good reasons for becoming t’em !
if you prefer to commit your own society suicide, carry on !
frogs we are and we’ll remain as so for eternity !
but do you have an history life ? apart merchands ones ?
Sep 21, 2009 - 2:26 pm 96. George S.:MC …most here do see that socialism is the enemy. I know that France is not the enemy, as for history ..we all have it, just some isn’t that pleasant.
regards
Sep 21, 2009 - 3:21 pm 97. misanthropicus:RE #95/ Marie Claude: [...] frogs we are and we’ll remain as so for eternity! but do you have an history life ? apart merchands ones? [...]
Oh, Marie-Claude, bless your soul! You are a real hero – I might be an odious American conservative republican but I still have soft spot, and you touched it. Bless you, here’s a pass and go wherever you wish – you are good woman.
TO ALL PJM personnel engaged on this thread: this debate has became very cruel, leave Marie-Claude alone, let her go…
Sep 21, 2009 - 3:38 pm 98. Anon:Obama Kills Missile Shield In Poland And Czech Republic, Then Our Nukes!!!
TREASON AND SURRENDER!!!
Doug “Leftist Thug” Roberts at http://lanl-the-rest-of-the-story.blogspot.com, two options:
(1) Either You Defend Our Nukes.
(2) If Not, Close Your Group Think Blog.
PS: Doug “Leftist Bias And Narcissist” Roberts, you made Frank Young´s blog irrelevant, due to the following:
(3) You don´t support modernization of the US nuclear arsenal, its delivery systems, underground testing, and missile defense.
(4) You don´t have a moral compass, e.g. you don´t recognize the real adversaries of US, e.g. AQ/Taliban, Iran, North Korea, China, and Russia.
(5) You have no respect for the US Constitution, Freedom of Speech, and the Victims of 9/11/01.
In summa: Close down this now irrelevant blog – due to the previous causes (1)-(5), and the overall embarrasment for the US nuclear weapons complex, and for America as a superpower – and foremost, Mr. Roberts as a Blog Jackass.
PPS: Doug Roberts= Barack Obama.
Sep 21, 2009 - 4:42 pm 99. Marie Claude:Alceste, do you want to get indulgences ?
now I leave you with prays
but I have your frame !
George S, I leave you with your own interpretations of socialism, that we aren’t fitting, see ya, we are such a pecular ones then, sorry we still are in the line of our history, and since Burke defined it was the evilest one, I’m quite happy to benefit of it, so are my children, also, and I hope my grand daughter will too
Sep 21, 2009 - 4:59 pm 100. Matthew:Paul of Alexandria:
“Yet. I’d rather prefer that they not be able to.”
That’s a ridiculous argument. You can apply that argument to all conceivable threats – real or imaginary. Iran is not threatening the US with missiles. It’s not threatening the US mainland with ANYTHING. Meanwhile, you have a finite amount of money and resources – so surely it’s better to spend that on the real threats?
Sep 22, 2009 - 3:21 am 101. carla:MARIE CLAUDE:
Charles DeGaulle was the ultimate narcissist. That isn’t necessarily bad, and, in fact, during WW II it was an admirable attribute, a counterweight to Churchill. But after WW II, it was a farce. It was his immense ego that rescued a decaying and moribund France. But his post-war pretensions, his ‘grandeur’, were, to most observers, funny, a Kabuki play. His sense of self-importance was only exceeded by the size of his nose. Mais, vive le France.
Sep 22, 2009 - 1:50 pm 102. Marie Claude:what you call narcissism isn’t fitting his personnality, sense of grandeur, of course, the ego had no place too. He was rather in the old noble style, that believed he had a destinity and a duty towards France, when he was in Brittain, he had to defend himself from subversive and pervert english and american vexations, he wasn’t the dearest french leader that they would chose, cuz too rigid and resistant to their directives, so his attitude was a dignified and disdain silence, that was perceived as irritating, and probably the “grandeur” come from these times too
You wouldn’t find a French that think what you say, even the “pieds-noirs”, that hated him, they would rather repproach his “machiavelism” in politic, concerning Algeria
But of course, a french leader that cares for french interests is most likely not appreciated by foreigners
Sep 22, 2009 - 5:56 pm