94 Comments

1. Lorenzo (from Oz):

You have the same link (to the CSM) twice.

Sep 17, 2009 - 4:14 am 2. Sobieski:

This is a repost from the previous thread, as it is much more appropriate here:

I know this topic has been thoroughly discussed here at the Belmont Club, and that this event was entirely foreseeable. However, when reading an article posted on Drudge covering this matter, I came across a little tidbit that left me a bit disheartened:

“Reports said an announcement would be made Thursday, the 70th anniversary of the 1939 Soviet invasion of Poland.

“This is very saddening that it happens on September 17. I hope this is just a coincidence,” said Witold Waszczykowski, deputy head of Poland’s National Security Bureau, which advises to the president, told Reuters.

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE58G0RT20090917?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0

What do you think – coincidence or not?

I’m leaning towards the latter.

Sep 17, 2009 - 4:20 am 3. wretchard:

Lorenzo, fixed.

Sep 17, 2009 - 4:21 am 4. Barry Meislin:

Let’s see now:

Israel.
Honduras.
Eastern Europe.
Other: __________.

And counting.

(Psst. Wanna guess what they’re thinking/feeling in Taiwan?…. Or for that matter, Japan and S. Korea? Though admittedly, it would be kind of fun watching Western Europe grovel, plead, and scrape for US defensive assurances….)

Peace in our time. You better believe it.

P.S. That Walid Jumblatt—he one smart dude (see Michael Totten).

Sep 17, 2009 - 4:33 am 5. Bob Smith:

Arguably, the threat from Iran is going to be from a nuclear bomb smuggled in on the ground, not from a missile. The problem I have is that Obama would never make that argument, because he denies Iran is a threat in the first place.

Sep 17, 2009 - 4:50 am 6. Foul Harold:

All the untold billions spent developing this system have been thrown out the door. Our eastern European allies who stood by us in Iraq over the last six years have been hung out in the wind. They will never trust us again, nor should they.

First the F-22, now this. What’s next? My money is on the next generation of aircraft carrier getting taken down. I for one will sure sleep better at night knowing our administration’s predilection for supplication will be working overtime in their place.

/sarcasm

Sep 17, 2009 - 5:23 am 7. Enscout:

There is a common thread between this and other events currently taking place.

The Bush coalition will be thoroughly destroyed.

The Sovi…Russia will ascend. Even today Amadinijad – Russia’s ME toady – has an American audience. Next stop for him and his buddy, BHO: the UN.

Watch for Russian stocks to climb.

One world: change you can believe in.

Sep 17, 2009 - 5:37 am 8. Mark:

I think child psychologists have a lot to say about “oppositional disorder,” . . . .

Sep 17, 2009 - 5:53 am 9. RWE:

Obama is sending signals, all right, and one day they are going to be smoke signals.

When I worked in the Pentagon and became privy to the many and varied ways that were being undertaken by the Democrats to sabotage SDI I predicted that Washington DC would one day suffer a shortage of lightpoles.

Because one day a missile would get through and there would not be enough lightpoles in DC on which to hang all of the people responsible.

Someone be sure to hang a “reserved” sign on the ones around 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

Sep 17, 2009 - 6:23 am 10. Lifeofthemind:

Given the demographic shifts happening there will be long term effects on American politics from Obama’s betrayals. He has offended, or threatened people with real world experience with totalitarians, who are significant and potentially growing segments of the American electorate. These include Eastern Europeans, Indians, Koreans, Chinese, Orthodox and Conservative Jews, and most non-Mexican Latinos. Whose interests has he aligned with? That group includes Black Americans descended from slaves, Puerto Ricans, Mexicans and some descendants of Western European elites. All except for the Mexicans are in relative decline as a future voting base. If the Republicans have any competence then they should be able to run against Obama for the next thirty years and beat the Democrats into the ground.

Sep 17, 2009 - 6:23 am 11. 907ie:

What do we need with a Missile Defense Shield when Obama is going to rid the world of nuclear weapons for once and all at next weeks UN conference that he is chairing. Just like the lack of funding for the US arsenal by his administration, you don’t put new brake shoes on a “clunker” headed for the crusher, much less install a new transmission.
Next, he’ll probably want to install a missile defense shield in Iran, to protect them from the Israeli arsenal, which he will describe as “the biggest barrier to peace in the Middle East”.

I thought the killing of the F22 was the worst thing that could happen, and it probably still is, but this one rates up there pretty good also!
Putin must be very busy now, running both east and west!

Sep 17, 2009 - 6:43 am 12. Annoy Mouse:

I have to admit that I never fully “got” the missile shield thing. If Iran is a missile threat is it just coincidence that the two host nations were at one time or another invaded by Russian tanks? Still if we are to make concessions then why not expect some reconciliation from Russia on the Iran issue. Instead we get their cooperation with the Chavez administration to build their “friendly” nukes. Seems to me Russia wants Israel or the US to bomb Iran. Sure wouldn’t hurt their position in the matter.

And finally, the US voting into office alternately hawks and doves must really confuse the hell out of the world and, in particular, these unforced errors must make everybody nervous.

Sep 17, 2009 - 6:44 am 13. Doug:

2164th said…
Here are primary Russian missile launch sites ;Kapustin Yar (KY), Tyuratam, (TT) or Baikonur, (BK), and Plesetsk(PK).

I monitored hundreds of missile launches from all three of these sites.

Putin will be pleased

Any missile defense system is a continuous work-in-process. They are never done. It will be tweaked and upgraded continuously. It is based on an ability to track, hunt and kill. It needs a target rich environment of realtime launches to continuously develop the electronics and data rich systems.

Russian test launches would be a perfect location. Lessons learned there would be used on systems worldwide. That’s how it works.

The missile crews would be nominally manned by military and heavy on engineers. They would not be given prior warnings of impending launches but would monitor and detect events, report them and depending on the event would advance their systems short of deployment, all under the watchful eye and ultimate control of command center in the US.

That’s what irritated the living shit out of Putin.

Sep 17, 2009 - 6:51 am 14. PeterRice:

Today the USA terminated the missile defense system bases in Poland and the Czech Republic to appease Russia.

Seventy years ago today the USSR (the Russian Marxist Empire) invaded Poland. Could the most perfect geniuses of the Obama administration have missed this 70th anniversary and the message of appeasement that it sends?

For details of that Russian invasion of Poland seventy years ago see the link below.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Poland

Sep 17, 2009 - 6:51 am 15. Mark Razak:

Are we REALLY surprised at this decision? This decision from our Donk elite who would probably agree far more than disagree with Amadinejad’s dream of “a world without America.” This decision, along with all of other The One’s decisions, is the highly predictable outcome when one uses a political calculus of a POTUS who is, and I am being VERY optimistic, deeply ambivalent about the role of his own country.

#2. Sobieski. I’m certain that September 17 held, and holds, absolutely NO significance to our leftist elite. I base my conclusion on the fact that I have at work a “friend” who is a big, big Noam Chomsky admirer. He considers himself a thinking man’s intellectual, well versed in affairs, domestic and foreign. During one of our heated discussions a while ago on WWII, I bought up the joint Nazi-Soviet invasion of Poland and the “Hitler-Stalin” pact. He was utterly dumbfounded. He had NEVER heard of both. (He thought that only Hitler invaded Poland.) You see, Sobiesk1, the Left always filters out inconvenient facts, but of course you already knew that.

Sep 17, 2009 - 6:55 am 16. dan:

Good point Doug/2164th. We Definitely should not have backed out then.

Sep 17, 2009 - 6:56 am 17. paddyspig:

OK, let me get this straight:

Iran has a history of animosity to the US;
Russia sends nuclear technology and missile technology to Iran.

Venezuela professes increasing animosity to the US;
Russian agrees to send nuclear technology and military capabilities to Venezuela.

Russian has demonstrated its animosity toward eastern Europe by military and economic actions taken against Georgia and Ukraine;

S0 — the US decides to curry favor with Russia by abandoning plans to build a missile defense system.

Let me see – could this be so we could be in a stronger negotiating position with Russia, Iran and Hugo Chavez?

What would Ron Reagan do? GWB? JFK?

Bibbi!!! Somebody!!!! Help these people out!

Sep 17, 2009 - 6:57 am 18. Sertorius:

#10 Lifeofthemind: “If the Republicans have any competence then they should be able to run against Obama for the next thirty years and beat the Democrats into the ground.”

Don’t forget the salt.

But that’s the issue that unifies Wretchard’s
“quango” post and this one–Obama & Co. don’t have to have to move with the choreographed professionalism of the famous “baptism scene” in “The Godfather” to get their way. Instead, they simply have to introduce enough entropy into the system that in the unlikely event a Reagan Recidivus appears on the scene, even reaching the status quo ante will be a monumental achievement. After all, how can you pluck the tares without damaging the wheat?

Sep 17, 2009 - 6:59 am 19. aaron:

This gives me a very icky feeling.

Sep 17, 2009 - 7:01 am 20. programmer:

So,…Do you think the recent agreement with Russia about permitting resupply, etc. ops for Afghanistan might have something to do with this?

Sep 17, 2009 - 7:04 am 21. Doug:

Sobieski,

It is also Constitution Day, but then, George Washington and crew were concientious objectors just like BHO, right? So no coincidence there.

National Constitution Center – Constitution Day
—

“This is very bad — without the shield we are de facto loosing a strategic alliance with Washington. Let’s hope the Patriots will arrive, but who knows,”
Waszczykowski said.

—
And it’s one, two, three,
what are we fightin’ for?

“I-Feel-Like-I’m-Fixin’-To-Die Rag”
Country Joe McDonald

PEACE

Sep 17, 2009 - 7:15 am 22. Obama Shelves Missile Defense for Czech Republic & Poland Allies … Russia, Iran, Putin Wins | Scared Monkeys:

[...] move was confirmed by the Czech Republic interim prime minister. “Just after midnight I was informed in a telephone call by President Barack [...]

Sep 17, 2009 - 7:19 am 23. dan:

programmer: yep. and do you think the taliban’s increasing success over the past few years, inducing us into increasing dependency on russia, has anything to do with russian support?

yep.

or do we still believe guys with goats and those jalopy buses in Spies Like Us are making 7.56 ammo out of Hindu Kush?

this is All about russia. obama’s entire foreign policy is all about russian appeasement. every axis of evil member – admitted or observer – is a russian appendage.

yet neither side wants to admit the cold war never ended. for conservatives, it would mean forgoing Reagan’s crowning achievement, for liberals it would mean revealing their Leninism.

so nevermind. let’s all just lie on our mortgage applications, get nice big mchouses and flat screen tvs and watch idiot spoiled adult brats scream at each other in the OC and atlanta until we are well past a strategic tipping point.

oops. we probably already are.

Sep 17, 2009 - 7:22 am 24. Annoy Mouse:

Thanks for the clarification Doug. I didn’t here one word about Iran though. If we can’t fool the Russians I guess we can’t expect to fool the European chattering classes. I understand why Poland and the Czech republic would want to draw the line in their countries and not in West Germany. But if Europe does not have enough nads to stand behind any mutual defense plan then how the hell are we to enforce it upon them? The missile defense is less than half of the problem and in and of itself is too little to plug the gap of vulnerability.

Let’s redouble our efforts to protect our own sphere.

Sep 17, 2009 - 7:22 am 25. Unsk:

Barry Meislin,

This is not ” Peace in Our Time”,

It is “Peace through Submission in Our Time”.

Sep 17, 2009 - 7:38 am 26. Lifeofthemind:

And now for some good news.
From Red State, A Signal that the European Parliament can govern from the right.

Sep 17, 2009 - 7:49 am 27. Doug:

Blast from the Past

Sep 17, 2009 - 7:56 am 28. Sobieski:

# 15 Mark Razak:

You may be right. As the saying goes, “do not attribute to malice what can be attributed to incompetance”; but honestly, with the level of incompetance in Washington approaching astronomic heights, I’m finding it increasingly difficult to believe that a “RED” fox has not entered the henhouse.

Sep 17, 2009 - 8:09 am 29. Enscout:

LOTM:

The inference of article you link is suspect. There is no “right” on the continent; only left of center and extreme left.

So I would describe what they speculate as “not as bad” as opposed to “good” news.

Now if we can only reverse the trend toward statism in our hemisphere.

Sep 17, 2009 - 8:24 am 30. Sobieski:

#23 dan:

“yet neither side wants to admit the cold war never ended. for conservatives, it would mean forgoing Reagan’s crowning achievement, for liberals it would mean revealing their Leninism.”

The communists just rebranded themselves as enviromentalists. Is there any wonder that Green Cross International (http://www.gci.ch/) was founded by Mikhail Gorbachev, who was also responsible for drafting the Earth Charter?

Van Jones – Obama’s former “Green Jobs Czar” – is another perfect example.

Sep 17, 2009 - 8:29 am 31. Rurik:

28. Sobieski:

There are other sayings too. “Once is an accident, twice is concidence, but three times is enemy action,” and “Paranoia means never having to say you’re sorry.”

Sep 17, 2009 - 8:44 am 32. Lifeofthemind:

RuriK,
“… three time is enemy action” comes from Ian Fleming’s Goldfinger. “We had a saying in Chicago Mr Bond …”

Sep 17, 2009 - 8:54 am 33. Josh:

I presume this move was initiated and supported by our secretary of state … let’s see, who is that again?

Actually, if this is “The Wall Street Journal reports…” then perhaps this is just a trial balloon anyway.

I wonder if Obama believes balloons are a proven technology …

Sep 17, 2009 - 9:06 am 34. stan:

Dan @ – it bears repeating: perfect description of the soft underbelly of the US today…

“so nevermind. let’s all just lie on our mortgage applications, get nice big mchouses and flat screen tvs and watch idiot spoiled brats scream at each other in the OC and atlanta until we are well past a strategic tipping point.”

Rurick @31 – and also: “Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean that they aren’t actually out to get you.”

Sep 17, 2009 - 9:13 am 35. stan:

The two biggest problems with this decision in my opinion:

1) Doug @13 – we lose the intelligence that goes along with the advanced listening post and real-time upgrades and

2) We stab our allies in the back and degrade any global consensus in favor of the Enlightened West against the harsh dark reality of the autocratic thugs… forcing fence sitters to yield to the intimidation of cold brute force.

A hundred years after T Roosevelt lead
the US onto the world stage as a force

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_White_Fleet)

we have the current Admin walking us off saying: “Walk softly and throw away your stick…”

Sep 17, 2009 - 9:24 am 36. dan:

Sobieski, i agree with you 100%.

And since Russia is responsible for the missile – or in their language the “rocket” – arsenals of NK, Iran, Venezuela, i’d say our monitoring russia’s primary western missile test site is 100% valid.

Sep 17, 2009 - 9:39 am 37. bob:

World Class Negotiating By Obumble

Sep 17, 2009 - 9:43 am 38. Subotai Bahadur:

The most dangerous thing in the world, is to be an ally of the United States. It can be depended upon that at some time the Left will take power and deliberately betray anyone that has ranged themselves at our side. The very fact that they sided with Western Civilization will be considered proof by the Democrats that they are ineradicably evil and must be destroyed.

The purpose of placing our missile defense sites in Eastern Europe was 3-fold. Eastern Europe, unlike Western Europe, has long experience with being conquered by dictatorships, both Nazi and Soviet. They aligned themselves with us, to the disgust of the EU. By placing those sites in Eastern Europe, we were pledging that unlike Western Europe in 1938-39, we were committed to their defense. That pledge has been broken. Second, for reasons not totally understood by me, we were trying to defend Western Europe from a possible Iranian attack. Iran has a history of attacking Western interests, despite Western Europeans deliberately looking the other way. If you look at the range circles of their missiles, they can reach Western Europe. They have yet to marry a usable warhead to one, but pretending that they won’t will not prevent it. Europe is now naked to a possible Iranian attack, because whether they realize it or not; we are not even going to pretend that a threat exists. Just as invocation of Articles 5 and 6 of the NATO Treaty by the United States will no longer [and wouldn't for quite a while] have any effect on European conduct; their invocation of the same Articles will not affect what we do. NATO is functionally dead, and Europe is on its own.

The only way you will see an influx of United States troops into Europe from now until the happy day when this regime falls [and probably never again, after such a fall]; is if we are providing logistical support for Arab League peacekeepers defending the “youths-whose-religion-must-not-be-named” in their ongoing riots in European cities.

Western Europe will not defend itself; it has lost the will and belief that such is possible or desirable. It is as if Charles Martel had been let the debased Merovingians in fact keep ruling what was left of the Franks, instead of running things behind the scenes. It is as if Jan III Sobieski had not gone to defend Vienna in 1683. Or as if Marshal Pilsudski had in August 1920 followed the recommendations of the Western Europeans and surrendered to the Bosheviks instead of turning them back to Russia at the Vistula.

Western Europe is toast, awaiting only for its conquerers to decide which one will get to take possession.

Those poor countries who made the mistake of believing that a Democrat administration would not abandon them, and America’s own interests, to appease its foreign enemies have only one very slim reed to lean on. Both Poland and the Czech Republic have Soviet era nuclear reactors operating. Soviet reactors designs are old and produce a lot of nuclear byproducts, some of which can be fabricated into fissionable materials that can be fabricated further. They have the industrial base. At the ranges that they are dealing with, they do not need missiles. One-way aircraft may be able to inflict unacceptable damage on potential aggressors. Perhap an Eastern European “League of Democracies” could create their own shield, protecting from ANY aggressor coming from ANY direction. [If they trust us or the Western Europeans again in anything, they will have proved themselves unfit to survive in the Darwinian sense.]

A similar strategy, I think, is becoming de facto in Asia. There are indications that Taiwan did not abandon nuclear research as demanded by the Clinton Administration and may have had no little success. Japan is popularly believed to be a few twists of a wrench from having a workable deterrent. Korea has the means, if they have the will. And if the countries can overcome their mutual antagonism in the face of common threats; such a joint effort will bear fruit very quickly.

Japan just elected a new government; one whose platform includes less dependence on the US. Buraq Hussein immediately gave the new government assurances of US protection and support. Those assurances are now worth far less than the bad sushi that former president Bush spewed all over the Japanese Prime Minister. The South Koreans and Taiwan are, I am sure, taking notes.

No matter who ends up governing the United States in the end, what is happening overseas is going to hurt us badly. Any future Patriot government of the US is going to be surrounded and besieged. But right now, we are neither capable, nor interested in, defending others because there is a great deal on our plate at home that must be dealt with.

We are desperately trying to hold back the Long Night.

Oh, RWE is right. For the last few years; one of the taglines at the end of something else I have put out has been:

Post Proximus Incursus [after the next attack]: Enough Ropes, Lamp Posts, and Willing Hands.

Subotai Bahadur

Sep 17, 2009 - 9:47 am 39. Rurik:

32. Lifeofthemind

I first remember hearing it from G. Gordon Liddy. If he got it as you describe, and I’m quite willing to believe you, the Chicago reference makes it even more ironic.

Sep 17, 2009 - 10:13 am 40. Eggplant:

Bob Smith said:

“Arguably, the threat from Iran is going to be from a nuclear bomb smuggled in on the ground, not from a missile. The problem I have is that Obama would never make that argument, because he denies Iran is a threat in the first place.”

The Islamic fascists will eventually sneak a large thermonuclear weapon into a US harbor on board a freighter with a suicide crew. There’s no practical defense against this. However this action would be their “last throw” (they would do this as an act of final desperation). Wretchard’s 2nd Conjecture (nuclear destruction of the Islamic world) would be the logical consequence after a major American port city was blown away. Even if Obama attempted to block a nuclear response, he would simply be removed by a military coup d’état and the first action of the new military leaders would be the systematic annihilation of any perceived nuclear threat from the Islamic world.

The missile shield in East Europe is a different kettle of fish. Simply having the power to destroy any European or American city at any time would give the Islamic fascists in Iran unacceptable political and diplomatic power. Even unused, this military threat would greatly leverage the fascist’s diplomatic capability and greatly destabilize the Middle East. The impact of a missile shield would mainly be to limit the certainty of this threat, i.e. Would the Iranian’s dare launch a missile attack against London if they suspected their missile would be destroyed in flight and the British strategic military response would subsequently burn Iran down to the ground.?

Obama’s action was ill advised but consistent with the whole moonbat mindset towards military power and real politics. This is just another swing of the political pendulum not unlike the swing from Neville Chamberlain to Winston Churchill in the 1930s. It’s stupid and pointless but seems to be something that human beings are unable to avoid.

Sep 17, 2009 - 10:26 am 41. always right:

Always a pleasure to read here at BC.

Is there by any chance some (if not all) of the discussions be bundled into a book or series of books?

Can the commentors agree to give consent of their labor?

Sep 17, 2009 - 10:38 am 42. Marie Claude:

well, who really thinks that missiles in Poland and Czechoslovakia ere to defend Europe against Iran ? none here does, even in Poland !

Poles wanted that Americans invested in their country –> more jobs and businesses would have followed there, for the same reasons that certain western EU countries don’t want Nato’s departure from their sites, ie Germany : Ramstein… Holland !

Turkey and Israel have replaced Poland and Czechs

http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Pentagon_backs_massive_missile_sale_to_Turkey_999.html

Israel will be alloted ships

these countries are far more better positionned to fight Iran than the Poles

Besides priviliging Turkey will prevent her from falling into the russo-caucasian alliance

Sep 17, 2009 - 10:41 am 43. Walt:

So Pootie Poot has won again
The Russian Tsar is smiling
The O is like a boy ‘mong men
Concessions he’s a-piling
The missile shield will never work
He claims with so much bluster
And since there’s darkness and much murk
I’ve used my strength to muster
Our allies and our foes alike
To sit around a table
And ask the Persians not to strike
At least not till they’re able
And we all know the reason why
The missile shield’s not needed
When Persian missiles start to fly
Towards Europe who’ve not heeded
All warnings of impending doom
From Persian radiation
The US will have little room
Avoiding degradation
So I agree with Pootie Poot
That Europe is a goner
And after that we’ll split the loot
And have our peace with honor

Sep 17, 2009 - 10:46 am 44. OldSalt:

Even if Obama is a one-term President, the Dems in Congress are tossed out on their ear in 2010, and Jeb Bush and Sarah Palin are Pres/VP (or vise versa), no country will ever trust America again. When the U.S.A. unilaterally and fecklessly renegs on security commitments as countries face the real prospect re-Sovietization by force by the Russian bear, how would any sane leader believe a commitment from one American President, knowing that it could be turned on it’s head by the next.

Obama just gave Putin the green light to do whatever the hell he wants in new Soviet Georgia, soon Soviet Ukraine, and any other country he feels like stretching out into.

Ukraine, for sure, is gone, whether they are smart enough to roll over and play ball, or Putin rolls tanks into the Ukraine.

Sep 17, 2009 - 10:48 am 45. Subotai Bahadur:

We all know that when Buraq makes a public statement it is a lie. The question usually is how long before it is proved such.

We have a new record. Just after announcing that we are abandoning missile defense [with the sub-text of also happily abandoning Eastern Europe to Russia and getting absolutely nothing from Russia in return to help control Iranian nukes]; with explicit reason given that Iran is not a nuclear threat, a report leaked out of the IAEA

Y’all remember the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN apparat whose prime function is to cover up the development of nuclear weapons in Islamic countries? They now admit that a) yes Iran is building nuclear weapons and b) they are on the path to putting them on missiles. Apparently the last 10 years of statements that Iran was not doing so are now inoperative.

The thing is, given their prime function, if the IAEA is admitting it now; Iran must be a lot closer than we thought. As in any day now.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9AP714G0&show_article=1

Wretchard, it might be time to repost the “Three Conjectures” for those who have not encountered them before. It has been a while since they went up.

Subotai Bahadur

Sep 17, 2009 - 11:30 am 46. Marie Claude:

http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/2009/08/28/01003-20090828ARTFIG00006-washington-tente-de-reduire-son-bouclier-antimissile-.php

Sep 17, 2009 - 11:42 am 47. Marie Claude:

“Le secrétaire général de l’OTAN Rasmussen a accueilli “avec satisfaction” la nouvelle, qualifiée de «positive step [which] would improve the involvement of all NATO nations»

http://www.dedefensa.org/article-bye_bye_bmde_17_09_2009.html

hmm some say that the US policy based on ideology has been replaced by pragmatism

BTW, on the Iran front, we are more present than any of the so “involved” good fellahs who pretend that they are, but who only are “phony”, see how they helped Georgia last year !

Sep 17, 2009 - 12:10 pm 48. Subotai Bahadur:

#46 Marie Claude

It took me a while to get the page translated, and I can tell that Yahoo is not getting it exactly.

1) The deployment of anti-missile systems on ships is dependent on the ships being there. We only have a couple of AEGIS vessels that have the equipment for the anti-missile systems. They are based in the Pacific because of the direct threats made by North Korea against the US. The defense budget proposed by Buraq Hussein does not make provisions for more as far as I know, and there is always the possibility that he will shut down what we have. Indeed, the only place he has been willing to cut Federal spending has been in Defense.

2) Unless it is super-secret stealth-ninja stuff, we are not negotiating with Turkey for missile/radar basing rights. Such negotiations would have to be secret even from the major parties in Turkey. If it is, it is not likely that Le Figaro would be privy to it, although I will admit that both Brit papers and Al Jazeera are giving more honest coverage of the US than the US media. Turkey is on the edge of an overtly Islamist government, and the very concept of such negotiations might provoke a civil war in Turkey. Ain’t gonna happen. As for Israel, they have their own concerns, and every “Arrow” missile that they can deploy is going to be needed to defend themselves. The idea of Buraq deploying any American anti-missile systems in Israel is ludicrous to the point of laughable. He WANTS an Iranian missile attack on Israel, and is doing just as the Europeans want, trying to kill off the Jews. He would never deploy American equipment that could possibly protect Israel. His own party would tear him to shreds if he tried.

The only game in play was in Eastern Europe. It is gone. Oh, by the way, the radars would have had another beneficial effect for the US. Iran is constantly extending the reach of its missiles, with Russian, Chinese, and Pakistani help. Some day, they may get an ICBM capability. If so, they will shoot north over the pole to hit us. Those radars would give us data we would need to protect ourselves.

In any case, as we have discussed before, each country will do what it deems to be in its own best interest. We have no obligations to each other. Sadly for most of us here, our own government is not operating in the interests of the United States, but in the interest of its enemies.

Subotai Bahadur

Sep 17, 2009 - 12:16 pm 49. Marie Claude:

Subotai, you’re only concerned by your interests too !

Today it is economical re-concentration

and US do not give their “protection” for backing “good services” (ie helping them in war expeditions) anymore, they SELL their protection, ie the missiles that are SOLD to Turkey, as well they will be to Israel, and to the Poles, if they want to buy t’em, but so far they haven’t got the means !

Sep 17, 2009 - 12:30 pm 50. Subotai Bahadur:

# 47 Marie Claude

Once again, had to have page translated, with the same inexactitude. Yes, the French, NATO, and the Russians are quite pleased. This is what is expected from this event, at least by us. I do note in the statement that they describe the “phantom Iranian missiles”. These would be the “phantoms” that the IAEA today after the American announcement said that Iran is developing? [see #45 above]

I rather expect that there will be an “I told you so.” moment in the near future.

Subotai Bahadur

Sep 17, 2009 - 12:30 pm 51. Marie Claude:

Why would be your alone description of the european policies be good ?

IAEA, everyone that has little infos awarness know that they are “nuts”, and no aare country would based their response to Iran on t’em ! but on real underground reports, made as so by Israel’s services and or Iranian dissidents.

Thing is that Iran has no obvious momentaneous means to launch a nuclear war, as soon as they would try it, Israel counter missiles, France’s, UK’s would vitrify the whole IRan country.

Besides, Chirac let escape this warning in January 2006, and that made a scandal among our pacifist neighbours (ie Germany)

Sep 17, 2009 - 12:43 pm 52. RCM:

6. Foul Harold:

“First the F-22, now this. What’s next? My money is on the next generation of aircraft carrier getting taken down. I for one will sure sleep better at night knowing our administration’s predilection for supplication will be working overtime in their place.”

Israel, twisting in the wind:

“Sorry, I’m not going to send any support to a country that started a Mid East war with Iran. I know all their neighbors are attacking with the help of the Russians. It’s their fault, they shouldn’t have taken out those nuke facilities. ‘Wax on – wax off’”

And after we refuse to help Israel and they are annihilated..what do you think is the next shoe to drop?

Sep 17, 2009 - 12:44 pm 53. Marie Claude:

and no aware country, was ment

Sep 17, 2009 - 12:46 pm 54. Marie Claude:

uh that was in january 2007

Sep 17, 2009 - 12:48 pm 55. RWE:

To amplify Subtoi’s comments:

1. Iran put a satellite in orbit this very year. That equals ICBM the same way Sputnik did and certainly confirms they can hit Eastern Europe. The idea of a new estimate changing those facts is absurd. Who thell did the estimate, Agent 00Idiot, Valarie Plame?

2. The “Negotiations” over Iran’s nuclear weapon program has long since surpassed the absurdity of a Monty Python skit.

3. We already have a radar in Turkey that watches Iranian missile launches. But that location is too close to do us any good for an interceptor site. By the time we figured out where the missile is going it would be out of range.

3. The USSR was able to intimidate Western Europe economically and politically simply due to the military danger it represented. Iran is looking for the same kind of leverage. Let Iran attain the capability to even shoot one nuke at Europe and watch how friendly those folks get with the Mad Mullahs. Note that while Western Europe certainly had the technical capability to develop a detterent missile force to respond to Soviet Theater nucelar missiles it was the U.S with its Pershings and Tomahawks that had to do it. Even the French land based Force’Frappe could not hit the USSR.

Sep 17, 2009 - 12:58 pm 56. RWE:

This just in:

VIENNA – Experts at the world’s top atomic watchdog are in agreement that Tehran has the ability to make a nuclear bomb and is on the way to developing a missile system able to carry an atomic warhead, according to a secret report seen by The Associated Press.

Sep 17, 2009 - 1:09 pm 57. Eggplant:

RWE said:

“Note that while Western Europe certainly had the technical capability to develop a detterent missile force to respond to Soviet Theater nucelar missiles it was the U.S with its Pershings and Tomahawks that had to do it. Even the French land based Force’Frappe could not hit the USSR.”

ABMs are hard to do. I recently had the opportunity to look at the aerodynamic model of the Pershing-II MaRV. I normally work on NASA entry systems but the Pershing-II MaRV was incredibly advanced. I suspect it would be almost impossible to stop a Pershing-II MaRV flying an evasive trajectory with anything less than an ABM using a nuclear explosive, e.g. something like the old Safeguard ABM system. Of course, an Iranian IRBM would be slightly more advanced than the old German V-2s. The lack of sophistication and the fact that there would not be many Iranian IRBMs were the real technical reasons why an anti-Iranian ballistic missile defense was technically possible.

Sep 17, 2009 - 1:12 pm 58. michaelhoskins:

Re the Subotai/Marie exchange.
I think both of you a little off top dead center, not much, but just enough.
Missles in place, regardless, are knights on the chess board…rather than pawns.
Iran (and Nork) are interested in nukes to feed the egos of dear leaders, to get them a seat on world stage.
Marie, the money paid by host nations is not close to the cost. A price is charged so the host nation has “skin in the game”. US interest, as mentioned further up the chain, is to have something in place that supports the evolutionary development of anti missle concept and to lower the ego value of a Iran’s system.

Finally, are we (the west) going to allow proliferation or not? Doing it now is much cheaper than later.

Sep 17, 2009 - 1:29 pm 59. Marie Claude:

“Even the French land based Force’Frappe could not hit the USSR.”

Not anymore !

http://www.dailymotion.com/relevance/search/missiles+tir+landes/video/x7e986_tir-de-missile-m51-13-novembre-2008_tech

Sep 17, 2009 - 1:29 pm 60. Subotai Bahadur:

#59 Marie Claude

Not to be picky, but the video is of a test shot of the M-51 weapons system for the submarines of the Force Oceanique
Strategique, not land based missiles. The 18 silo based IRBM’s on the Plateau d’ Albion were dismantled and the silos destroyed in 1998. France’s entire nuclear deterrent is carried on carrier based aircraft and on submarines.

The video was of a land-base TEST launcher made to duplicate the launch of a submarine missile from underwater as part of the operational certification process before deployment on the subs. It is not an operational silo.

Subotai Bahadur

Sep 17, 2009 - 1:54 pm 61. Marie Claude:

Subotai, yes, essentially submarines’, aren’t we a navy country or Switzerland ?

I’m not an expert in such arms, so I only rely on what our responsibles and army say.

Chirac was talking of the submarines !

Sep 17, 2009 - 2:05 pm 62. Josh:

Y’know, the F-22 issue is clouded by the fact that we want to save our billions for the next generation of UCAVs, of which one assumes the best are still secret.

It is not beyond the realm of possibility that in cancelling this announced missile defense, the same thing may be in play, there may be some black bag new technology (laser) missile defense technology not more than a year or two behind the deployment dates for the old stuff.

Of course, any excuse to save a dollar now, for a hamburger next Tuesday, would please Obama anyway, but I think the irony would be rich indeed if he is making some of these decisions on the basis of black programs he cannot yet tell us about.

Sep 17, 2009 - 2:17 pm 63. Marie Claude:

Michael

“Finally, are we (the west) going to allow proliferation or not?”

apparently no ! wasn’t it the motive of the missiles crisis in Poland all about ?

Russia was threatening to not re-signed the treaty of non-proliferation and would bost the race to nuclear arms at the end of this year.

and yes, I know that host countries have to offer their part too, Poland was going to built bases, which she hasn’t started, since she guessed that the agreement signed last year with Rice (during Georgia war BTW) would not be honorred after Obama was elected

Sep 17, 2009 - 2:17 pm 64. RWE:

Eggplant:

I am sure you are correct but I was referring to a DETERRENT force in Europe to counter Soviet theater nuclear missile systems, not something to intercept them.

This was to prevent the USA from having to fire our own strategic deterrent missiles to counter the Soviet systems. The idea was to prevent the USA from having to trade cities with the Soviets in the event of a theater war in Europe.

The Yerps could have built their own theater nuclear missile systems that might not have been as good as ours but should have done the job. But instead we did it for them. And they whined and cried and had mass demonstrations about it, too, the poor babies.

The same logic applies to missile defense. They ain’t gonna do it themselves, so we have to do it to prevent us having to deal with a bunch of crybabies who will give Hitler, uh, excuse me, Iran, anything they want in order to not have to study war no more.

And yes, Subtoi and Marie, I was referring to the French land based Pluton missile force, which has the same capability today attack Russia as it did when it actually existed, a capability identical to that of the Swiss Navy.

Sep 17, 2009 - 2:22 pm 65. Eggplant:

Josh said:

“Y’know, the F-22 issue is clouded by the fact that we want to save our billions for the next generation of UCAVs, of which one assumes the best are still secret.”

This is true. The F-22 was way too expensive. It’s painful to admit this but the era of the manned fighter plane maybe coming to a close. However the good news from an aeronautical engineer’s perspective is this will open up aeronautics to new areas of research and development.

The constraints of human physiology had pretty much limited fighter planes to one flight envelope. Non-stealthy fighter planes from different countries were tending to look alike (fighter plane design was almost a solved problem). The introduction of stealth technology tended to make the aircraft more expensive and compromised their aerodynamics, e.g. the F-117 flew like a pig and was barely controllable. However with UAVs, all bets are off. The designer is no longer constrained by crew safety or physiology. A really exciting area is hypersonic UAVs, e.g. scramjet propelled hypersonic aircraft. There’s lots lots of work being done there now but it’s all very black. It’s quite possible that sometime in the next decade some sort of UAV SR-71 will appear out of the blue, flying at Mach 7 rather than merely at Mach 3.4.

Sep 17, 2009 - 2:35 pm 66. Marie Claude:

RWE, but Russia has no intention to invade any EU country anymore, it’is more benefitful for her to sell them energy, of course, if the bills are honorred.

Naturally, we couldn’t have stand alone against a soviets war, though the fact that we had/have such arms could have made them to think about it before, we could have made them some objective damages !

If you remember how Tchernobyl nuclear accident is was an emotional failure and still an obsession in their mind, then you can realise that they ren’t the guis that would use instinctively such arms, but only if they will be their last rescouse

Sep 17, 2009 - 2:38 pm 67. Marie Claude:

Again Swiss navy has no submarine, while we have 7

better compare us to UK

Sep 17, 2009 - 2:41 pm 68. Eggplant:

RWE said:

“The Yerps could have built their own theater nuclear missile systems that might not have been as good as ours but should have done the job. But instead we did it for them. And they whined and cried and had mass demonstrations about it, too, the poor babies.”

I lived in Germany from 1984-1987. From what I could see, young Europeans were completely seduced by Gramscian agit-prop. The only thing really holding NATO together was the older generation’s direct experience with WW-II and the United State’s insistence that we (the Americans and Western Europeans) not capitulate to the Soviet Block. The West won the Cold War mainly through the Grace of God. If the Soviets could have held out for another decade then their investment in Green Politics and Liberation Theology would have paid off. As it stands, Green Politics while still a curse is really only a fading after-glow from the Cold War.

Sep 17, 2009 - 2:45 pm 69. spindok:

Enemy will certainly attack.

Defence is based on this axiom.

What is problem here?

Spindok

Sep 17, 2009 - 2:59 pm 70. dan:

“Green Politics while still a curse is really only a fading after-glow from the Cold War.” Sadly, every idiot in line with me at Whole Foods tonight would probably disagree with that proposition.

Sep 17, 2009 - 3:00 pm 71. Josh:

of course there have been rumors for years that the “Aurora” is already flying, replacing the SR-71.

But I thought nobody could actually make the scramjets work, as of yet. So the Navy wants Mach 6 rail guns. Dubious.

Sep 17, 2009 - 3:06 pm 72. whiskey:

Neither Poland, nor Hungary, nor the Czech Republic wish to be Soviet Satellites again. So, they will nuke up ASAP. They probably have already had that in the works to hedge against Obama predictably betraying them.

Which means it will not be 1939 again. Not even Putin will trade Moscow for Warsaw.

Nuke proliferation is guaranteed by this. The alternative to the US Defense umbrella is not surrender. It is a guarantee of global nuclear proliferation.

Sep 17, 2009 - 3:08 pm 73. Fletcher Christian:

There are two recent developments that provide a glimmer of hope, both in the UK. One is the BBC actually mentioning the religion of the liquid-explosive bomb plotters who are responsible for the current draconian regulations on plane carry-ons – not once but three times in the same 3-minute report. And the other is the recent rather violent (because “anti-racist” counter-protesters crashed the party) protests against Islamic extremism and in fact Islam itself (quote from a banner: No More Mosques) by residents of London. Finally we are beginning to wake up.

Roughly a year ago, I predicted mosque-burnings within two years. We are on track for that. Just perhaps, when a major European city goes up in radioactive smoke, we (the French and/or British) will make the appropriate response – and Riyadh, Tehran, Mecca, Medina and Qom will be poisonous smoke blowing in the wind.

Sep 17, 2009 - 3:16 pm 74. steeple:

I have to agree with Whiskey here.

The two biggest ironies to me of the Obama administation:

1) Obama was able to engage young Americans in the political process during the campaign. Now he has managed to engage older Americans after the campaign.

2) These same yahoos who want to talk about eliminating nuclear weapons from the face of the earth are going to be the cause of the biggest nuclear proliferation in the past 30 years, as they can’t see past their noses.

Sep 17, 2009 - 3:23 pm 75. Eggplant:

Josh:

“of course there have been rumors for years that the “Aurora” is already flying, replacing the SR-71.
But I thought nobody could actually make the scramjets work, as of yet. So the Navy wants Mach 6 rail guns.”

It’s hard to say if Aurora was real. Aeronautical engineers like to gossip even though we’re not supposed to. The best hallway gossip that I heard about Aurora was it was an unmanned replacement for the SR-71 that was a little bit faster but was cancelled because it was too expensive to fly.

Scramjets successfully provided positive thrust for the X-43A (google it). Scramjet research and development went black in the United States after the success of NASA’s X-43 program (which was cancelled). The driving technology of a scramjet is the supersonic combuster. The first successful flight of a supersonic combuster was in Australia on 30 July 2002. The project was called “HyShot” and was managed by the University of Queensland (again, google this for more details). Australian scramjet research and development continues to this day mainly through funding by the Australian Defence, Science and Technology Organisation (DSTO). I suspect the DSTO funds this work so they have a bargaining chip to trade with other nations for advanced military technology. Some of the best aeronautical engineers in the world are Australian.

Sep 17, 2009 - 3:25 pm 76. Marie Claude:

The Obama administration’s four-phase plan would deploy existing SM-3 interceptors using the sea-based Aegis system in 2011, then after more testing deploy in 2015 an improved version of the interceptors both on ships and on land along with advanced sensors. A still more advanced version of the interceptors would be deployed in 2018 and yet another generation in 2020, the latter with more capacity to counter possible future intercontinental missiles.

By doing so, officials said, they would be getting the first defenses in place far earlier than the Bush plan, which envisioned deploying in 2018 the bigger ground-based interceptors that are still being developed. The SM-3 missiles have had eight successful tests so far. And with more short- and medium-range missiles to counter, the administration said it may deploy hundreds of the SM-3s, compared to just 10 of the ground-based interceptors Mr. Bush planned.

The Obama review of missile defense was influenced in large part by evidence that Iran has made significant progress toward developing medium-range missiles that could threaten Europe, even as the prospects of an Iranian intercontinental ballistic missile that could reach the United States remain distant.

The Obama team relied heavily on the work of a Stanford University physicist, Dean Wilkening, who presented the government with research this year arguing that Poland and the Czech Republic were not the most effective places to station a missile defense system against the most likely Iranian threat. Instead, he said, more optimal places to station missiles and radar systems would be in Turkey or the Balkans”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/18/world/europe/18shield.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

Sep 17, 2009 - 3:28 pm 77. cjm:

obama is doing a lot of damage to the leftists in this country; he has exposed the malignancy before it became terminal. it’s not a pleasant process to go through, but in 2012 the country will be far better off than it was in 2008. he is making things very clear for the non-hardcore-left in this country.

think about this: he is clearly floundering and lost — incapable of doing the job. there will be a period of flailing by his administration but no clear forward progress. the new communication channels are pouring out information to counteract the msm, and are in fact overwhelming the msm.

and if the nukes do start flying, America is best placed to weather things relatively unscathed.

Sep 17, 2009 - 4:36 pm 78. blert:

Eggplant @40…

This is just another swing of the political pendulum not unlike the swing from Neville Chamberlain to Winston Churchill in the 1930s.

As ill fated the Munich ‘Conference’ was – Chamberlain’s bungled diplomacy ran in tandem with a staggering ramp-up of military spending. Winston fought WWII with the weapons systems provided by Chamberlain’s government:

Spitfire
Hurricane
Merlin Aero-engine ( Spitfire, Lancaster, Mustang, Mosquito…)
Chain-Home Radar
Royal Navy Refit ( Radar & much more )
Bletchley Park

THE jerk that deserves finger pointing is BALDWIN. He’s the flake that ‘Clintoned’ Britain.

////

MC @42…

Turkey is ALREADY too close to Iran – it’s the natural gas: consumption now and future transits.

PAC-3 Patriots under the control of Islamist Ankara…

How does that solve anything?

////

For the good of humanity Israel is going to do what must be done. Under no conditions can she expect support from the poltroon in chief.

Sep 17, 2009 - 4:37 pm 79. Josh:

Best place for defensive system is in orbit anyway.

Actually, the best defense, is a good offense.

I’m mildly skeptical that this was a good idea in the first place, though I am even more mystified by just what Russia ever had against it. Politically it was a good idea – and perhaps that *is* just what Russia ever had against it.

Sep 17, 2009 - 5:11 pm 80. Kirk Parker:

Subotai (45), no worry, the Three Conjectures are right here where Richard left them.

Sep 17, 2009 - 5:18 pm 81. blert:

Aurora exists…

Whether it went into regular service due to its astounding cost is a huge question mark.

Aurora operates in multiple modes…

Horizontal take-off to high sub-sonic…

Orbital boost phase – an astounding sight, for sure…

Un-observed third phase towards objective.

///

I observed the orbital boost phase from Northern California. I was fortunate in that I witnessed the final moments of subsonic flight which was straight north with a massive contrail. This was followed by a pivot to the west (towards NORK!) and a loss of the contrail. Without too much delay the main boost kicked in. I’d estimate the power level to be equal or beyond the Saturn V. (!) This was plainly NOT a hypersonic drive. As to what could be driving it – it’s not in the literature.

The tempo of acceleration and lift up and out of the atmosphere was dramatic in the extreme. The burn time was remarkable. And after all of that – at the very end – the energy burn doubled yet again! And then, poof, it was gone.

The next day I brought up my observations at work. At least two of my co-workers had witnessed the same event. I was the only one to have seen the turn and transition.

About a year later I brought this up with a job acquaintance and he’d seen it too. Then he revealed that he’d seen Aurora at low level in the earliest morning hours descending fast into one of our most secretive USAF bases. It was surrounded by a posse of F-16 chase planes ( think camera equipped ) that brought back the feel of Lucas’ Star Destroyers. He described it as being wildly larger than any other aircraft that has ever flown. He figured you could’ve bought three or four aircraft carriers with the money he saw there.

Sep 17, 2009 - 5:19 pm 82. Marie Claude:

blert,

“Turkey is ALREADY too close to Iran – it’s the natural gas: consumption now and future transits”

uh, I have seen many trucks and tankers going through Kurdistan to get the Iraki oil rather than the iranian !

Besides Azerbaijan, is the next, and that motivated her negociations with Armenia again.

Sep 17, 2009 - 6:05 pm 83. Eggplant:

blert said:

“Aurora exists…
Whether it went into regular service due to its astounding cost is a huge question mark.
Aurora operates in multiple modes…
Horizontal take-off to high sub-sonic…
Orbital boost phase – an astounding sight, for sure…
Un-observed third phase towards objective.
I observed the orbital boost phase from Northern California.”

I would love for it to be true that Aurora exists or existed. However I’m very sceptical. In the California sky I have seen on multiple occasions the contrails from a Minuteman-III test out of Vandenburg AFB. How do you know that what you saw was not simply a Minuteman-III test? Again, aeronautical engineers like to gossip and I have only heard the vaguest of rumors about Aurora. It would be impossible to keep a successful single stage to orbit (SSTO) vehicle secret. Quite frankly, I doubt that SSTO is even technically possible. NASA and Lockheed-Martin tried to do SSTO with X-33 and failed miserably. If the technology was already in hand from Aurora then why did X-33 fail so badly? It doesn’t add up. If Aurora does exist, it was probably only a design tweek on the SR-71, e.g. an unmanned drone that could get up to Mach 4 on a variable cycle subsonic combustion ramjet. This would simply be a souped up version of the old D-21 drone (there are still a few of them stored at NASA Dryden collecting cob webs).

Sep 17, 2009 - 6:27 pm 84. Josh:

blert, what you describe sounds like a ballistic launch, rumors of Aurora were a mothership launching something like the X-15 but I guess a whole lot larger – which could still be ballistic, I suppose, a secret militarized shuttle, or mini-shuttle, whether launched from the ground or from altitude. Maybe a mini-shuttle with somewhat more manuevering capability than the old shuttle, could even skip down to moderate altitude of 100,000 feet or so over target, and still recover enough orbit to get home, and/or enough air-breathing propulsion to fly home instead of glide to the ground.

Just how did we get onto this? Oh, I responded to the mention of scramjets. For which, yes, we have little test models launching, running for a few seconds, and then blowing up and falling down. Pity. The idea’s only been around since the 1950s, at least.

Hey excellent Wikipedia article on the D-21, I didn’t know most of that, OK I didn’t know any of that!

Sep 17, 2009 - 6:40 pm 85. Fen:

The Obama administration’s four-phase plan would deploy existing SM-3 interceptors using the sea-based Aegis system… getting the first defenses in place far earlier than the Bush plan, which envisioned deploying in 2018.. may deploy hundreds of the SM-3s, compared to just 10 of the ground-based interceptors Mr. Bush planned.”

Assuming Obama can be trusted to follow through with this…

It does seem like a smarter strategy. Mobile, not static defenses, that can be re-positioned quickly.

Someone pls explain why its not better?

Sep 17, 2009 - 6:51 pm 86. Eggplant:

Josh said:

“Hey excellent Wikipedia article on the D-21, I didn’t know most of that, OK I didn’t know any of that!”

I actually had the opportunity to get my hands on a D-21 when I was last at NASA Dryden a few years ago. There were 3 or 4 of them there (old pieces of junk left out in the rain). I also saw an old SR-71 there that was falling apart (sad to see). I presume it has since been hauled off to a museum. There was some casual talk about retrofitting a D-21 with a rocket motor and doing something funky with it. Unfortunately it was found out that there was lots of asbestos in the D-21’s structure (the D-21s were made in the early 1960s before people got freaked-out about asbestos). Of course, dealing with asbestos is no big thing (just keep it wet). However the bureaucratic issues from the safety Nazis would have been intolerable so the idea never got past the idle conversation phase.

Sep 17, 2009 - 7:06 pm 87. Standing in the Shadows:

Here’s the thing that I keep wondering. Does Obama intend to dis’ all of our country’s allies or just the ones that sided with Bush the past eight years, (i.e. England and Poland)?

Sep 17, 2009 - 7:30 pm 88. dan:

Fen & Co.:

my guess is that the interceptors/radar installation were as much about getting an infrastructural foothold in the old Soviet domain as anything else. several things suggest the USA military industrial complex is well-aware that the present government of russia intends to reassert itself overtly over its former sphere of inluence to the exclusion of nato/usa, but it has been politically difficult to do so thus far. (1) first reorganize russia, then (2) allow the world to adjust, (3) take advantage of your invisibility, (4) provoke a major crisis, and (5) manage the ensuing strategic reorganization in such a way that the dispersed resources of the West force it to accept otherwise unpalatable things – e.g. georgian invasion. physical assets provide an ‘objective’ basis from which USA could grow in former Warsaw Pact. perhaps the most reasonable, painless, diplomatically palatable way of maintaining the neutrality of former Warsaw Pact states is to (1) slowly increase the visible power and prestige of Moscow while (2) keeping everyone else (USA) out (e.g. via crises in the Islamic world), until it appears natural that so powerful and large a state as the resurgent russia has exclusive claim to influence Bulgaria, etc. Byelorussia and Russia already/still maintain a formalized “Union of Russia and Belarus.” I wouldn’t be surprised if that were the kernal from which a new USSR will bloom.

but of course iran does have icbm’s (they are russia’s client) as they proved with the “satellite launch.” whether they made/make it themselves or not, it is also reasonably likely they already have some nuclear warheads just as insurance for russia’s nuclear energy “investment.” after all, they can’t bank on a deal if mossad’s going to figure out what’s up before the concrete dries. yossef bodansky claims russia sold iran a few nukes in the early 90s, which was the beginning of russia/iran’s strategic relationship. who knows, but it sounds plausible for sure. and of course a couple 9/11 hijackers DID go through Iran on their way to USA…

Sep 17, 2009 - 7:37 pm 89. Subotai Bahadur:

#85 Fen

Is there anything in any discussion of military budgets that would indicate that Buraq Hussein is increasing any budgets for any form of SDI? In fact, every phase is on the budgetary chopping block. What we were talking about, and starting to fund, will be better than systems being talked about but never funded or built. And no, Obama cannot be trusted to do anything positive for the security of the United States. And a whole lot of people around the world are going to end up dying because of him.

Subotai Bahadur

Sep 17, 2009 - 7:45 pm 90. juke313:

What would Israel Do?

Sep 17, 2009 - 10:29 pm 91. Batman:

On the day of the election someone close to me said, “Obama is 1/3 incompetent, 1/3 grandiose utopian leftist, and 1/3 Islamic.”

Formula:

a) Raise the deficit so high that there will be insufficient money left to fund the military. Then use cost as the reason to reduce the technological advantage our military has over other nations. In the name of international cooperation, renege on agreements with our best friends and allies.

b) Devalue the dollar so that currency speculators will profit and the US economy will become less central to the rest of the world.

c) Make as many citizens as possible dependent on governmental programs. Create bureaucracies that have little accountability and less supervision and then staff them with cronies.

d) Undermine the concept of citizenship.

e) Appoint Justices and Judges who will subordinate American Constitutional values for international norms.

Sounds like a plan.

Sep 17, 2009 - 11:58 pm 92. Eggplant:

Josh said:

“I responded to the mention of scramjets. For which, yes, we have little test models launching, running for a few seconds, and then blowing up and falling down. Pity. The idea’s only been around since the 1950s, at least.”

Ramjets have been around since the 1950s but scramjets are more recent. Antonio Ferri is regarded as the inventor of the scramjet. A paper Ferri published in 1973 is often cited as the original work on scramjets although someone like Ludwig Prandtl probably could have figured it out back in the 1930s. The main difference between a scramjet and ramjet is the combustion process in a ramjet occurs behind a normal shockwave so it’s subsonic. With a scramjet, the combustion process is behind an oblique shockwave so it’s always supersonic.

Flight testing a scramjet is hard to do. The biggest problems are efficient fuel injection and thermal protection of the air frame. The flight test of the X-43A was of short duration because it really did not have a proper thermal protection system. All they really wanted to do was show that the inlet could get started, not unstart after the combustion process got under way and positive thrust could actually be produced. This was demonstrated and everyone came away from the X-43A tests convinced that Antonio Ferri’s concept actually worked (too bad Ferri didn’t live to see it himself).

By the way, Antonio Ferri had an interesting life. It’s worth it to google his biography.

Sep 18, 2009 - 12:12 am 93. Al_Batross:

“Just how did we get onto this? Oh, I responded to the mention of scramjets”. Josh@84.

There are many things which make BC special, but personally I am drawn to it by the digressions.
Just about any time I feel the urge to post a comment on something, and become engaged in the effort of getting my words into some semblance of order, I turn around to find that an entertaining distraction has broken cover and is being pursued around the board. And it is usually much more appealing than whatever it was that I was going to say.

Sep 18, 2009 - 1:20 pm 94. M. Simon:

I also saw an old SR-71 there that was falling apart (sad to see). I presume it has since been hauled off to a museum.

This past summer at a family reunion I saw an SR-71 hanging from the ceiling of the Offut Air Base Museum. It was truly wonderful drinking from an open bar under that sucker.

I had a few lines of code on the SR-71. My relatives were impressed.

Sep 19, 2009 - 5:44 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments:

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail