Democrat foreign policy

[VaYank5150]

To one who doesn't understand the system, that's a possibility. To those who do, it makes perfect sense.

Good. If you would please invite someone who DOES understand the system to these boards, I believe a good debate could be had.

This particular system has two major functions - detection and interception. For these functions of this system to operate effectively, a certain time-in-flight of the target is required for effective interception. The trajectory of an ICBM launch from Pakistan or Iran would require that the missile travel over Europe, so Poland is a strategic location for this system.

Here is a decent summary of this system: BBC NEWS | Americas | How US missile defence system works

I understand how it is SUPPOSED to work, but since they have yet to prove that it actually DOES work, why are we going to throw good omeny after bad?

 

[Navy1960]

do you bitch about all the money we spend in Mexico and on illegals,? how about all the money we waste in Africa?

yes, i am a bit of an isolationist,i support tax dollars aiding Americans in America and not foreigners in foreign lands. So do you favor tax dollars going to protect foreigners? If so why? And why would you support tax money benefitting foreigners but not support tax dollars protecting Americans(healthcare)?

Can someone please expalin to me why SOME people see this as a BAD thing?

This is somewhat way off topic here and you will pardon the observation, but you have an image of Joshua Chamberlin from Maine and live in Virginia? Curious, one would think that a Virginian would have a image of Lee and before all of you PC people jump in here, there is nothing implied in that other than location. As I love to read on the civil war and admire the story of Chamberlin quite a bit.

 

[VaYank5150]

yes, i am a bit of an isolationist,i support tax dollars aiding Americans in America and not foreigners in foreign lands. So do you favor tax dollars going to protect foreigners? If so why? And why would you support tax money benefitting foreigners but not support tax dollars protecting Americans(healthcare)?

Can someone please expalin to me why SOME people see this as a BAD thing?

This is somewhat way off topic here and you will pardon the observation, but you have an image of Joshua Chamberlin from Maine and live in Virginia? Curious, one would think that a Virginian would have a image of Lee and before all of you PC people jump in here, there is nothing implied in that other than location. As I love to read on the civil war and admire the story of Chamberlin quite a bit.

Thanks for the observation. To make a LONG story short, my Father served in the USAF and was stationed at Dow AF Base (now Bangor Int'l Airport), Maine when I was born. Being in the AF, we moved around quite a bit until he retired from Langley AFB here in Virginia. So, I live in VA now, but my "home" in Maine. PLUS, I reenacted as a Union soldier with the 4th US Infantry for almost 12 years. AND, you would be hard pressed to find a better story than that of Chamberlain and his 20th Maine Infantry holding the line on Little Round Top!

 

[Si modo]

Good. If you would please invite someone who DOES understand the system to these boards, I believe a good debate could be had.

This particular system has two major functions - detection and interception. For these functions of this system to operate effectively, a certain time-in-flight of the target is required for effective interception. The trajectory of an ICBM launch from Pakistan or Iran would require that the missile travel over Europe, so Poland is a strategic location for this system.

Here is a decent summary of this system: BBC NEWS | Americas | How US missile defence system works

I understand how it is SUPPOSED to work, but since they have yet to prove that it actually DOES work, why are we going to throw good omeny after bad?

I understand that view as this system does not yet have a kill rate as high as other systems. It really still is in development as far as improving kill rate. We scrap it, and we can't continue development. IMO and based on my limited knowledge of it, improving kill rate is not some far-fetched plan, either. By doing this, we cut further develoment for a more than promising system, but also assuming that increased kill rate is acheived; we cut a necessary system considering the nature of nuclear threats in a post Cold War world.

 

[VaYank5150]

This particular system has two major functions - detection and interception. For these functions of this system to operate effectively, a certain time-in-flight of the target is required for effective interception. The trajectory of an ICBM launch from Pakistan or Iran would require that the missile travel over Europe, so Poland is a strategic location for this system.

Here is a decent summary of this system: BBC NEWS | Americas | How US missile defence system works

I understand how it is SUPPOSED to work, but since they have yet to prove that it actually DOES work, why are we going to throw good omeny after bad?

I understand that view as this system does not yet have a kill rate as high as other systems. It really still is in development as far as improving kill rate. We scrap it, and we can't continue development. IMO and based on my limited knowledge of it, improving kill rate is not some far-fetched plan, either. By doing this, we cut further develoment for a more than promising system, but also assuming that increased kill rate is acheived; we cut a necessary system considering the nature of nuclear threats in a post Cold War world.

This system has been under development for more than 15 years. To date, we have spent more than $62 BILLION on a system that MIGHT work some day? Other than our government, who else pays that kind of money for something that still doesn't work?

 

[Si modo]

I understand how it is SUPPOSED to work, but since they have yet to prove that it actually DOES work, why are we going to throw good omeny after bad?

I understand that view as this system does not yet have a kill rate as high as other systems. It really still is in development as far as improving kill rate. We scrap it, and we can't continue development. IMO and based on my limited knowledge of it, improving kill rate is not some far-fetched plan, either. By doing this, we cut further develoment for a more than promising system, but also assuming that increased kill rate is acheived; we cut a necessary system considering the nature of nuclear threats in a post Cold War world.

This system has been under development for more than 15 years. To date, we have spent more than $62 BILLION on a system that MIGHT work some day? Other than our government, who else pays that kind of money for something that still doesn't work?

It's more than a might work situation. It works. As I am the antithesis of a luddite, I have no issues with the government spending money on continued develoment of new and much needed technology, especially when the kill-rate improvement is feasible. I am also very in favor of government spending on basic research. Both are in our best interests.

 

[Polk]

why should my tax money go for defending poland and the czech republic? why should we spend money protecting foreigners but not on American healthcare?

do you bitch about all the money we spend in Mexico and on illegals,? how about all the money we waste in Africa?

I assume you are referring to the humanitarian aid we provide to Africa?

Yeah, we really break the bank on that...

 

[namvet]

I can't comment on dimwitts foreign policy till i see one

 

[Polk]

do you bitch about all the money we spend in Mexico and on illegals,? how about all the money we waste in Africa?

yes, i am a bit of an isolationist,i support tax dollars aiding Americans in America and not foreigners in foreign lands. So do you favor tax dollars going to protect foreigners? If so why? And why would you support tax money benefitting foreigners but not support tax dollars protecting Americans(healthcare)?

Can someone please expalin to me why SOME people see this as a BAD thing?

I'd say it's a bad thing from a national power standpoint if it doesn't advance a national interest.

 

[ozzmdj]

This was not a by accident.......Soviet invasion of Poland - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[VaYank5150]

This was not a buy accident.......Soviet invasion of Poland - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What's a "buy accident"?

 

[ozzmdj]

'I blogged a couple of weeks ago that the Obama administration was about to abandon its plans for Third Site missile defence installations in Poland and the Czech Republic. I wrote then that “if enacted, this would represent a huge turnaround in American strategic thinking on a global missile defence system, and a massive betrayal of two key US allies in eastern and central Europe. Such a move would significantly weaken America’s ability to combat the growing threat posed by Iran’s ballistic missile program, and would hand a major propaganda victory to the Russians.”........Barack Obama surrenders to Russia on Missile Defence - Telegraph Blogs

 

[VaYank5150]

'I blogged a couple of weeks ago that the Obama administration was about to abandon its plans for Third Site missile defence installations in Poland and the Czech Republic. I wrote then that “if enacted, this would represent a huge turnaround in American strategic thinking on a global missile defence system, and a massive betrayal of two key US allies in eastern and central Europe. Such a move would significantly weaken America’s ability to combat the growing threat posed by Iran’s ballistic missile program, and would hand a major propaganda victory to the Russians.”........Barack Obama surrenders to Russia on Missile Defence - Telegraph Blogs

Sorry. We simply can't afford it.

 

[ozzmdj]

'I blogged a couple of weeks ago that the Obama administration was about to abandon its plans for Third Site missile defence installations in Poland and the Czech Republic. I wrote then that “if enacted, this would represent a huge turnaround in American strategic thinking on a global missile defence system, and a massive betrayal of two key US allies in eastern and central Europe. Such a move would significantly weaken America’s ability to combat the growing threat posed by Iran’s ballistic missile program, and would hand a major propaganda victory to the Russians.”........Barack Obama surrenders to Russia on Missile Defence - Telegraph Blogs

Sorry. We simply can't afford it.

You have no prove of that

 

[VaYank5150]

'I blogged a couple of weeks ago that the Obama administration was about to abandon its plans for Third Site missile defence installations in Poland and the Czech Republic. I wrote then that “if enacted, this would represent a huge turnaround in American strategic thinking on a global missile defence system, and a massive betrayal of two key US allies in eastern and central Europe. Such a move would significantly weaken America’s ability to combat the growing threat posed by Iran’s ballistic missile program, and would hand a major propaganda victory to the Russians.”........Barack Obama surrenders to Russia on Missile Defence - Telegraph Blogs

Sorry. We simply can't afford it.

You have no prove of that

Sure I do. The Republicans say every day that we can't afford healthcare reform. So, how in the world could we afford a missile defense shield in Poland and CZ?

 

[ozzmdj]

Sorry. We simply can't afford it.

You have no prove of that

Sure I do. The Republicans say every day that we can't afford healthcare reform. So, how in the world could we afford a missile defense shield in Poland and CZ?

Read the Constitution kook the defense of this country is in there not health care

 

[nodoginnafight]

the defense of poland is NOT.

 

[nodoginnafight]

and btw - ripping off Neil Bortz speaks very poorly of your "blogging"

 

[Si modo]

the defense of poland is NOT.

LOL. This isn't for the defense of Poland. In the original deal, Poland was to get some Patriots (and some other stuff, just can't recall at thi moment) in return for our setting up a shield in their territory.

 

[ozzmdj]

the defense of poland is NOT.

Thanks clueless