No to Missile Defense

[Navy1960]

After a rancorous argument over missile defense, Democrats on the House Armed Services Committee voted June 16 to limit the number of missile interceptor silos in Alaska to 30, scrapping 14 more that were planned when Republicans controlled Congress and the White House.

Then they voted not to increase spending on the years-late, billions-over-budget airborne laser
Democrats Vote to Cut U.S. Missile Shield Spending - Defense News

The Airborne Laser, a modified Boeing 747 carrying laser systems to track and destroy ballistic missiles as they are in the early stages of flight, completed another milestone...

Airborne Laser test successful | Air Capital Insider | Wichita Eagle Blogs

6/18/2009 - Kirtland Air Force Base, N.M. (AFNS) -- Members of the 413th Flight Test Squadron, Hurlburt Field, Fla., and contractor Boeing recently successfully fired the high-power laser aboard the Advanced Tactical Laser aircraft for the first time in flight.
Advanced tactical laser aircraft fires high-power laser in flight

Yet, we spend money on failed attempts to bailout car companies, then banks, and tunnels for turtles, studying the habits of mice, the list is endless. However, how prudent is it to cut defense at the same time over spend in other area's when you engaged in combat operations worldwide? as well as seeing the obvious threats from powers the world over? It would appear that the Govt.would have no trouble at all funding these programs had they not been funding things that need not be funded. I'm sure the honeybee's and the promotion of bow and arrows is really important however, it's rather nonsense to tell the DoD that they are not spending well and this is not proven technology when your spending millions on turtle tunnels.

 

[American Horse]

After a rancorous argument over missile defense, Democrats on the House Armed Services Committee voted June 16 to limit the number of missile interceptor silos in Alaska to 30, scrapping 14 more that were planned when Republicans controlled Congress and the White House.
<SNIP>

Yet, we spend money on failed attempts to bailout car companies, then banks, and tunnels for turtles, studying the habits of mice, the list is endless. However, how prudent is it to cut defense at the same time over spend in other area's when you engaged in combat operations worldwide? as well as seeing the obvious threats from powers the world over? It would appear that the Govt.would have no trouble at all funding these programs had they not been funding things that need not be funded. I'm sure the honeybee's and the promotion of bow and arrows is really important however, it's rather nonsense to tell the DoD that they are not spending well and this is not proven technology when your spending millions on turtle tunnels.

It's almost as if the Democrats fear these defenses actually will work. Not because they want to be struck while undefended ( heaven forbid ! ) - something they are sure will never happen if we just play nice - but also they are so desperate to oppose or undue anything by a Republican president for fear they may just get a leg up in the public's mind.

If these defenses were shown to work, actually dependably every time, they would then be preferred to any other option; but it seems they'd prefer Mutually Assured Destruction back from the bad old days, which could only work if we were known to be tough as nails. With Obama there is some question about that.

 

[Annie]

For now 'we're ready', but will that be true in the future?

US shores up missile defense in Hawaii in response to N. Korea threat | csmonitor.com

posted June 19, 2009 at 8:20 am EST -
US shores up missile defense in Hawaii in response to N. Korea threat
The US deployed antimissile defense systems in response to reports that North Korea could launch a long-range missile toward the island early next month.

By Liam Stack
• A daily summary of global reports on security issues.

The US military has deployed antimissile systems to Hawaii to beef up the islands' defenses in response to intelligence reports that North Korea may test-fire long-range ballistic missiles toward the state around the July 4 holiday.

Analysts say North Korea has little to gain from shooting test missiles at the United States, and suggest this latest move could reflect internal political divisions over the country's foreign policy and the eventual succession of its leader, Kim Jong-il. The secretive state heightened its threatening rhetoric after the UN Security Council imposed sanctions on the North in response to its nuclear test May 25. North Korea, which has also tested long- and short-range missiles in the past months, has threatened to respond "a thousand-fold" if provoked....

 

[DiveCon]

For now 'we're ready', but will that be true in the future?

US shores up missile defense in Hawaii in response to N. Korea threat | csmonitor.com

posted June 19, 2009 at 8:20 am EST -
US shores up missile defense in Hawaii in response to N. Korea threat
The US deployed antimissile defense systems in response to reports that North Korea could launch a long-range missile toward the island early next month.

By Liam Stack
• A daily summary of global reports on security issues.

The US military has deployed antimissile systems to Hawaii to beef up the islands' defenses in response to intelligence reports that North Korea may test-fire long-range ballistic missiles toward the state around the July 4 holiday.

Analysts say North Korea has little to gain from shooting test missiles at the United States, and suggest this latest move could reflect internal political divisions over the country's foreign policy and the eventual succession of its leader, Kim Jong-il. The secretive state heightened its threatening rhetoric after the UN Security Council imposed sanctions on the North in response to its nuclear test May 25. North Korea, which has also tested long- and short-range missiles in the past months, has threatened to respond "a thousand-fold" if provoked....

and if Obama has his way we wont be ready

 

[Xenophon]

We don't need it, we like having the threat of nukes on our heads.

 

[MaggieMae]

After a rancorous argument over missile defense, Democrats on the House Armed Services Committee voted June 16 to limit the number of missile interceptor silos in Alaska to 30, scrapping 14 more that were planned when Republicans controlled Congress and the White House.
<SNIP>

Yet, we spend money on failed attempts to bailout car companies, then banks, and tunnels for turtles, studying the habits of mice, the list is endless. However, how prudent is it to cut defense at the same time over spend in other area's when you engaged in combat operations worldwide? as well as seeing the obvious threats from powers the world over? It would appear that the Govt.would have no trouble at all funding these programs had they not been funding things that need not be funded. I'm sure the honeybee's and the promotion of bow and arrows is really important however, it's rather nonsense to tell the DoD that they are not spending well and this is not proven technology when your spending millions on turtle tunnels.

It's almost as if the Democrats fear these defenses actually will work. Not because they want to be struck while undefended ( heaven forbid ! ) - something they are sure will never happen if we just play nice - but also they are so desperate to oppose or undue anything by a Republican president for fear they may just get a leg up in the public's mind.

If these defenses were shown to work, actually dependably every time, they would then be preferred to any other option; but it seems they'd prefer Mutually Assured Destruction back from the bad old days, which could only work if we were known to be tough as nails. With Obama there is some question about.

Oh please, people. We spend more on defense systems than all other nations COMBINED. Maybe some of these programs wouldn't have been cut if DoD could account for all the billions appropriated every year (about $1.1 trillion identified at the last GAO report). But the DoD's accounting and inventory system is so fucked up it can't be fully audited. Maybe the military branches who demand these weapons systems should have paid more attention to where their funding was going in the past.

 

[Navy1960]

I'm willing to admit that the DoD is in dire need of changing the ways its pruchasing systems work. Too often its over bloated with Adminstration issues, graft, and just plain nonsense. The problems here can be seen in the lack of systems needed for the warfighter, take a look the research is available. How long has it been since the Air Force has fielded a new Tanker Aircraft, or perhaps the Army with a New Medium Tank. The list is endless. It's not that money is not spent on programs it's spent unwisely and then the programs that ARE needed are often cancelled as sources for funding for little pork projects like for example, Hiring a person with Stimulus money who's job it is to get more Stimulus money, thats in N.C. Missile Defense, even if one Missile is never launched as has been with the US Strategic Nuclear Submarines, if they deter a nation from acting in a hostile way towards they the United States then the investment is well worth the safety of this nation. Now as I have said many times on here, I will be among first in line to make suggestions as to how to reform purchasing at DoD and end this long cycle of contracting that has for example had the US Air Force flying an airframe thats design dates to the 40's. Want another good example, the Navy has taken it upon itself to retire, ships earlier than needed in some cases 15 to 20 years earlier, to make way for the LCS. So has the US Air Force with the F117. Those are the kinds of moronic decisions that are being made at DoD not for stragetic reasons but for for political reasons.

 

[concept]

He said he was going to do it. There was youtube and everything.

We all know he is wrong, we can only hope nothing bad happens to prove it.

 

[MaggieMae]

I'm willing to admit that the DoD is in dire need of changing the ways its pruchasing systems work. Too often its over bloated with Adminstration issues, graft, and just plain nonsense. The problems here can be seen in the lack of systems needed for the warfighter, take a look the research is available. How long has it been since the Air Force has fielded a new Tanker Aircraft, or perhaps the Army with a New Medium Tank. The list is endless. It's not that money is not spent on programs it's spent unwisely and then the programs that ARE needed are often cancelled as sources for funding for little pork projects like for example, Hiring a person with Stimulus money who's job it is to get more Stimulus money, thats in N.C. Missile Defense, even if one Missile is never launched as has been with the US Strategic Nuclear Submarines, if they deter a nation from acting in a hostile way towards they the United States then the investment is well worth the safety of this nation. Now as I have said many times on here, I will be among first in line to make suggestions as to how to reform purchasing at DoD and end this long cycle of contracting that has for example had the US Air Force flying an airframe thats design dates to the 40's. Want another good example, the Navy has taken it upon itself to retire, ships earlier than needed in some cases 15 to 20 years earlier, to make way for the LCS. So has the US Air Force with the F117. Those are the kinds of moronic decisions that are being made at DoD not for stragetic reasons but for for political reasons.

Secretary Gates made major cuts in many defense programs that drew immediate criticism at the time, but I think he also left the door open to reconstituting some if situations became critical, like the current threats from North Korea.

The thing is we can have trillions invested in defense mechanisms and still not have a 100% guarantee that any one of them might fail at a crucial moment. We only have to look at the attacks of 911. We had the most sophisticated defense programs in the world to guard against such an attack, so what happened?

 

[Bfgrn]

After a rancorous argument over missile defense, Democrats on the House Armed Services Committee voted June 16 to limit the number of missile interceptor silos in Alaska to 30, scrapping 14 more that were planned when Republicans controlled Congress and the White House.

Then they voted not to increase spending on the years-late, billions-over-budget airborne laser
Democrats Vote to Cut U.S. Missile Shield Spending - Defense News

The Airborne Laser, a modified Boeing 747 carrying laser systems to track and destroy ballistic missiles as they are in the early stages of flight, completed another milestone...

Airborne Laser test successful | Air Capital Insider | Wichita Eagle Blogs

6/18/2009 - Kirtland Air Force Base, N.M. (AFNS) -- Members of the 413th Flight Test Squadron, Hurlburt Field, Fla., and contractor Boeing recently successfully fired the high-power laser aboard the Advanced Tactical Laser aircraft for the first time in flight.
Advanced tactical laser aircraft fires high-power laser in flight

Yet, we spend money on failed attempts to bailout car companies, then banks, and tunnels for turtles, studying the habits of mice, the list is endless. However, how prudent is it to cut defense at the same time over spend in other area's when you engaged in combat operations worldwide? as well as seeing the obvious threats from powers the world over? It would appear that the Govt.would have no trouble at all funding these programs had they not been funding things that need not be funded. I'm sure the honeybee's and the promotion of bow and arrows is really important however, it's rather nonsense to tell the DoD that they are not spending well and this is not proven technology when your spending millions on turtle tunnels.

Yea!!! Why spend money to help people when we can spend money to kill people!
WHAT kind of monsters are these Democrats?

 

[Navy1960]

I'm willing to admit that the DoD is in dire need of changing the ways its pruchasing systems work. Too often its over bloated with Adminstration issues, graft, and just plain nonsense. The problems here can be seen in the lack of systems needed for the warfighter, take a look the research is available. How long has it been since the Air Force has fielded a new Tanker Aircraft, or perhaps the Army with a New Medium Tank. The list is endless. It's not that money is not spent on programs it's spent unwisely and then the programs that ARE needed are often cancelled as sources for funding for little pork projects like for example, Hiring a person with Stimulus money who's job it is to get more Stimulus money, thats in N.C. Missile Defense, even if one Missile is never launched as has been with the US Strategic Nuclear Submarines, if they deter a nation from acting in a hostile way towards they the United States then the investment is well worth the safety of this nation. Now as I have said many times on here, I will be among first in line to make suggestions as to how to reform purchasing at DoD and end this long cycle of contracting that has for example had the US Air Force flying an airframe thats design dates to the 40's. Want another good example, the Navy has taken it upon itself to retire, ships earlier than needed in some cases 15 to 20 years earlier, to make way for the LCS. So has the US Air Force with the F117. Those are the kinds of moronic decisions that are being made at DoD not for stragetic reasons but for for political reasons.

Secretary Gates made major cuts in many defense programs that drew immediate criticism at the time, but I think he also left the door open to reconstituting some if situations became critical, like the current threats from North Korea.

The thing is we can have trillions invested in defense mechanisms and still not have a 100% guarantee that any one of them might fail at a crucial moment. We only have to look at the attacks of 911. We had the most sophisticated defense programs in the world to guard against such an attack, so what happened?

Maggie, I don't think there is any such thing as a 100% guarantee in anything in life ,especially when it comes to defense issues. I do think however, that if funds are spent in a prudent manner and for systems that are needed and in an environment that has proper oversight, there will be enough funds to finance the military's needs as well as the needs of social programs where too often the monies are diverted too. However, when I use the term social programs I'm talking about things such as the above mentioned crossing for Turtles in Fl. or other such programs that have value to someone somewhere.

 

[Bfgrn]

BIG military and BIG Criminal justice/prison system is BIG, BIG, BIG government...

 

[mrafmomo]

na its good

 

[mrafmomo]

preach on

 

[mrafmomo]

all nite