« Lies, Statistics, and the 45,000 dead from lack of insurance | theCleverBulldog's Blog | Say it ain't so, BHO! »
Swords, Shields, and Stupidity
Now it has been revealed that Iran has a second, secret, uranium enrichment plant. Our intelligence analysts missed this apparently until recently. This comes just days after Obama scrapped plans to defend against Iranian long range missiles, because our Intelligence analysts concluded that the greater threat was from medium/short range missiles. Now, assuming that these analysts are suddenly right in this instance, the defense against short range missiles is available now, it involves no new development. So does it make sense to wait until a defense against long range missiles is absolutely needed to start building one? It's too late then, it takes years to build the needed radars and launcher silos. Wouldn't it be prudent to defend against all threats? This is particularly true in light of Obama's stated goal of eliminating all nuclear weapons. If you eliminate the ability to retaliate, you better have the ability to defend. If you give up your sword, you'd better pick up a shield. Obama thinks it wise to give up everything and hope for the best, proving he is too naive to hold the office.
Advertisement
We cannot realistically 'defend against all threats.'And the fact is, I did not believe the previous Administration when they claimed the missile defense system was designed to protect against Iran. It was designed to protect against Russia. IMHO.
Now Iran is not the one, or even the largest, threat Obama has to defend against. As a matter of fact Iran is not a threat to the U.S. Why do I say this? Because the Dawa government of al-Maliki that we at enormous expense of blood and treasure installed- is Iran's best friend in the region. Would we have deposed an enemy of this supposed 'great menace,' Saddam Hussein, and installed a bunch of- exiles living in IRAN- if we were not in fact in cahoots with this nation we publicly despise?
The missile defense system was aimed against Russia. Russia has given us free passage to bleed ourselves to death in Afghanistan with their bases. Surely they would not have done this if some quid pro quo were not in the offing. Well, here it is.
(Plus the missile defense system is the very definition of boondoggle, which Republicans should abhor. Look up 'Maginot Line' on wikipedia for more on this topic.)
September 25, 2009 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
"If you eliminate the ability to retaliate, you better have the ability to defend. If you give up your sword, you'd better pick up a shield. Obama thinks it wise to give up everything and hope for the best, proving he is too naive to hold the office."
You are too naive to address the topic sufficiently. There are other regional powers outside of the simple US vs. Iran dichotomy you choose to present. Russia has a non-aggression pact with Iran, for example. Russia is a much larger threat than Iran will become in decades. Russia is a present threat because the technology they already have is what Iran wishes to emulate on a minute level.
So, our decision to remove the long-range defense systems in Russia's sphere of influence has altered the diplomatic landscape. Russia is now interested in imposing sanctions on Iran. Iran has suddenly revealed the existence of a second enrichment facility. This will likely be opened for inspection, thus opening the nation to increased diplomatic pressures. The idea is to NOT provoke an armed conflict where one is unnecessary. This has been diplomatic SOP for a very long time, and those few instances in our nation's history where have ignored this precept has resulted in disaster. Think Viet Nam, Korea, and Iraq.
If Iran does continue to present a threat, we have our cop on the beat: Israel. We also have NATO.
The fact of the matter is that our missile defense systems in Eastern Europe were designed to encroach into Russia's sphere of influence, not protect us from rogue Iran. If you were to actually look at the world map, you would see that Iran is surrounded by nations that already have systems in place. Moving the goalpoasts was about rattling sabers with Russia.
If anything, Bush could be praised for accidentally creating a negotiating chip to move Russia diplomatically to the bargaining table on isolating Iran from its militant pretensions.
Your view is unnecessarily simplistic...
September 25, 2009 3:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am well aware of the fact that the defense system provided other benefits. The reason Poland and the Czech Republic wanted it was to reduce the threat to them from Russia. It would have solidified our relationships with them, and lessened Russia's ability to threaten the region. As far as pressure on Iran, there has been none, and Iran did not reveal this plant because of pressure from Russia.
September 25, 2009 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh really? What prompted this change of heart? Why did Iran announce to the IAEA of that which our intelligence was unable to find on their own?
And if you are well aware, then why avoid that in your discussion? Is it because it complicates your THIS IS SPARTA vision of world affairs?
And finally, exatly how does a missile system defend Poland and the Czech Republic from Russia? Does Russia have to lob ICBMs at these two nations? Last time I checked, the only thing Russia had to do was look at them funny. I reccomend a google search of the term Finlandize.
Reduce the threat. Harharharharhar! (h/t to Ruta)
Oh man, do you get your deep and abiding knowledge of world affairs from deep thinkers like Krauthammer, Brooks, and Kristol? I reccomend you actually go back to their punditry from the last administration and compare their predictions to today's reality. In other words, find another master's voice to focus upon. These mandarins ain't it.
September 25, 2009 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
And yet-
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/09/25/2080577.aspx
You don't suppose that having Obama drop this missile defense
helped with Russia getting on board here. The again if you did you might have to say Obama got it right, but that would totally be against your preconceived positions.
September 25, 2009 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Reflexive opposition requires no facts, judgment, or rational thought.
Good thing, since The Toothless Chihuahua is not very good with any of them.
September 25, 2009 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
The reason Poland and the Czech Republic wanted it was to reduce the threat to them from Russia.
Not true. Poland agreed to host the missile complex base in return for billions of dollars to upgrade Polish air defenses.
September 26, 2009 2:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, you lack either a sword or a shield, but you certainly did bring the stupidity, there, Chihuahua.
Than again, it's what we can count on you to do regularly.
September 25, 2009 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
For all of the broohaha over this missile defense system... to my knowledge there was no evidence that it was 'ever' going to work effectively which is pretty damn risky considering the cost and stupid based on the state of our economy.
September 26, 2009 9:41 PM | Reply | Permalink