White House to Scrap Bush's Approach ...

White House to Scrap Bush's Approach to Missile Shield

There are 35 comments on the www.nytimes.com story from Sep 17, 2009, titled White House to Scrap Bush's Approach to Missile Shield. In it, www.nytimes.com reports that:

The Obama administration plans to announce on Thursday that it will scrap former President George W. Bush 's planned missile defense system in Eastern Europe and instead deploy a reconfigured system aimed more at intercepting shorter-range Iranian missiles, according to people familiar with the plans.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.nytimes.com.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
progressive

Lamoni, IA

#25 Sep 17, 2009
Il Brutto wrote:
<quoted text>A simple minded response from the simple minded.
BTW-Do you really think conservative have cornered the market on courage? Can you say "deferment"? That was a popular word with Limbaugh and Cheney about forty years ago.
I call them right-wing extremists, not conservatives. There used to be honorable conservatives, and there are still a few. The right wing extremist nut-cases are trying to run them out, and replace them all with their own kind. Decent conservatives need to be encouraged to return to honorable politics and policies, such as not supporting all the wasteful spending and unnecessary earmarks during the GOP Congresses and the Bush Administration. But the non-hateful conservatives and Republicans, and conservative Christians, also, have reason to fear the hateful ones. The ultra-right wing has run out almost all the liberals and moderates from the GOP, and now the only decent ones remaining are the more old-fashioned traditional conservatives. and Ron Paul - and he is so unusual that it would be unfair to put some ordinary descriptive label on him. But other than his assocaitions with some horrible people, and being supported by some horrible people, and some naive ideological economic views, he does have some interesting potential merits - especially compared with the LaRouchies, the Constitution Party, and the unprincipled right-wingers who dominate the House GOP.
stoooopix

Lebanon, IN

#26 Sep 17, 2009
bill_mr. misssso again?:)

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

#27 Sep 17, 2009
Coolmind wrote:
the missile shield was a dumb (bush!) idea... it wouldn't work, and just incited the Russians... like we can afford that. Talk and diplomacy is much cheaper and safer than war
As if "the Russians" are any kind of threat.
The real threat right now is Iran, which Bush Jr allowed to go nuclear while he was wasting time, lives, and treasure in Iran.

Do you recommend the Howard House Tavern?

pitiful failure

United States

#28 Sep 17, 2009
Coolmind wrote:
the missile shield was a dumb (bush!) idea... it wouldn't work, and just incited the Russians... like we can afford that. Talk and diplomacy is much cheaper and safer than war
Does it remind you of your birth control shield that failed and gave you that lesbian daughter?
Doc

United States

#29 Sep 17, 2009
Smooth move Obama. Like Exlax. Did you consider the Eastern Europe reaction? Maybe Bush is right, he doesn't have a clue...
Coffee smells good

Denver, CO

#30 Sep 18, 2009
Doc wrote:
Smooth move Obama. Like Exlax. Did you consider the Eastern Europe reaction? Maybe Bush is right, he doesn't have a clue...
He doesn't have a clue, as don't many politicians. The good ones surround themselves with people smarter than they are. The stupid ones surround themselves with those they own paybacks to.

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Kansas City, KS

#31 Sep 18, 2009
Coolmind wrote:
the missile shield was a dumb (bush!) idea... it wouldn't work, and just incited the Russians... like we can afford that. Talk and diplomacy is much cheaper and safer than war
What's Obama's plan? To put ships off Iran's coast? Obama's dumber than Bush!

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Kansas City, KS

#32 Sep 18, 2009
Doc wrote:
Smooth move Obama. Like Exlax. Did you consider the Eastern Europe reaction? Maybe Bush is right, he doesn't have a clue...
Did Democrats give Iran the nuclear bomb?

In December 2007, President Bush tried to rally the nation and tried to warn the world because intelligence showed that Iran was in hot pursuit of the nuclear bomb.

But Democratic Party presidential hopefuls — including Barack Obama — clinging to an outdated intelligence report — said Bush was rattling sabers.

It was good politics among the liberal elites whose votes they sought in the primaries.

Hillary Clinton:“It is absolutely clear that this administration and President Bush continues to not let facts get in the way of his ideology.”

Joe Biden:“Let’s get this straight, in 2003 (Iran) stopped their program, you cannot trust this president, he is not trustworthy. It is outrageous, intolerable and it must stop … the president of the United States — it’s like watching a rerun of his statements on Iraq five years earlier. Iran is not a nuclear threat to the United States of America. Iran should be dealt with directly with the rest of the world at our side.”

They were warned.

They ignored it.

As far as Iraq goes, every single Democrat in the Senate except Ted Kennedy (and I remember this) said Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction. Democratic Sen. Bob Byrd said we gave Saddam Hussein WMD.

So this Bush lied crap is crap.

Today, the report from AP is Iran has the nuke tech it needs.

The sad sacks in the White House need to take full blame. They were warned. They chose to ignore it. Heck, they chose to campaign against doing the right thing as Americans and ending politics at the water’s edge. They put personal ambition first, national security second. Now they are president, vice president and secretary of state.

The blood is on their hands now.

The Associated Press report in full:

VIENNA (AP)— 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.

The document drafted by senior officials at the International Atomic Energy Agency is the clearest indication yet that the agency’s leaders share Washington’s views on Iran’s weapon-making capabilities.

It appears to be the so-called “secret annex” on Iran’s nuclear program that Washington says is being withheld by the IAEA’s chief.

The document says Iran has “sufficient information” to build a bomb. It says Iran is likely to “overcome problems” on developing a delivery system.

http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/2009/09/...

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Kansas City, KS

#33 Sep 18, 2009
Coffee smells good wrote:
<quoted text>
He doesn't have a clue, as don't many politicians. The good ones surround themselves with people smarter than they are. The stupid ones surround themselves with those they own paybacks to.
CONTRARY TO THE OBAMA Admin: Iran has expertise to build nuclear bomb, says UN report

Iran's scientists have cracked the problem of building a nuclear bomb and studied how to deploy atomic warheads on missiles, according to a confidential United Nations report.


By David Blair, Diplomatic Editor
Published: 5:02PM BST 18 Sep 2009

It finds that Iran's scientists already have the expertise to build a crude atomic bomb, known as an "implosion nuclear device". The report also says Iran has "sufficient information to be able to design and produce a workable implosion nuclear device based on highly enriched uranium as the fission fuel".

At present, however, Iran could not build such a bomb because it does not possess uranium enriched to weapons grade level. Its experts are, however, enriching uranium inside an underground plant in Natanz.

- To the Best of our knowledge -, So far, they have only produced material of the purity needed to run civil nuclear power stations. Given time, however, they could produce highly enriched uranium required for a bomb.

The document, prepared by experts at the International Atomic Energy Agency, had not been disclosed to the 35 countries on the organisation's board. The internal report summarises everything the IAEA knows about the "possible military dimension of Iran's nuclear programme".

The IAEA report also finds that Iranian scientists have studied how to build a nuclear warhead capable of delivery on a missile. They tried to modify a missile so that it could carry a warhead that is "quite likely to be nuclear". They also tested the system of explosives used to detonate a nuclear warhead.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of Iran, has always publicly denied any ambition to build a weapon. But the IAEA report says that he wanted to acquire nuclear weapons as long ago as 1984, when he served as president. He allegedly told a meeting of senior officials that a "nuclear arsenal would serve Iran as a deterrent in the hands of God's soldiers".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/6206609/Iran-...

The Bush administration said that a planned Missile Defense system — with a radar near Prague and interceptors in northern Poland — was meant as defense against Iran. But Poles and Czechs saw it as protection against Russia, and Moscow too considered a military installation in its backyard to be a threat.

"No Radar. Russia won," the largest Czech daily, Mlada Fronta Dnes, declared in a front-page headline.

Obama said the old plan was scrapped in part because the U.S. has concluded that Iran is less focused on developing the kind of long-range missiles for which the system was originally developed, making the building of an expensive new shield unnecessary.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090918/ap_on_re_...

And there is some optimism among administration officials that a nuclear Iran would practice restraint.

Gary Samore, Obama's top advisor on nuclear proliferation, and Bruce Riedel, who is running Obama's review of policy on Afghanistan and Pakistan, wrote last year that a nuclear-capable Iran, while undesirable, would not be the end of the world. For example, they argued, it seems unlikely that Tehran would give nuclear weapons to terrorists.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentar...

Has Obama Screwed Up Again? Probably. Par for the Course though.

“Hello Trump”

Since: Jan 07

Goodby Hillary

#35 Sep 18, 2009
Hilldabeast called the Polish President to "explain" the decision on the missile defense plan and he refused to talk to her...... Can't say as I blame him.
Il Brutto

Torrance, CA

#36 Sep 18, 2009
To all those screaming about the cancelation of this missle program I have a question. How do we pay for it? Hey Poland you wanna chip in? Oh, you can't afford it? I thought so.
Isn't time to rethink our military and the amount we spending? Can we afford to spend over half trillion dollars a year like we have?

“Hello Trump”

Since: Jan 07

Goodby Hillary

#37 Sep 21, 2009
Il Brutto wrote:
To all those screaming about the cancelation of this missle program I have a question. How do we pay for it? Hey Poland you wanna chip in? Oh, you can't afford it? I thought so.
Isn't time to rethink our military and the amount we spending? Can we afford to spend over half trillion dollars a year like we have?
Can we afford NOT to?

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

#38 Sep 21, 2009
The laughing liberal wrote:
<quoted text>
Did Democrats give Iran the nuclear bomb?
In December 2007, President Bush tried to rally the nation and tried to warn the world because intelligence showed that Iran was in hot pursuit of the nuclear bomb.
But Democratic Party presidential hopefuls — including Barack Obama — clinging to an outdated intelligence report — said Bush was rattling sabers.
It was good politics among the liberal elites whose votes they sought in the primaries.
Hillary Clinton:“It is absolutely clear that this administration and President Bush continues to not let facts get in the way of his ideology.”
Joe Biden:“Let’s get this straight, in 2003 (Iran) stopped their program, you cannot trust this president, he is not trustworthy. It is outrageous, intolerable and it must stop … the president of the United States — it’s like watching a rerun of his statements on Iraq five years earlier. Iran is not a nuclear threat to the United States of America. Iran should be dealt with directly with the rest of the world at our side.”
They were warned.
They ignored it.
As far as Iraq goes, every single Democrat in the Senate except Ted Kennedy (and I remember this) said Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction. Democratic Sen. Bob Byrd said we gave Saddam Hussein WMD.
So this Bush lied crap is crap.
Today, the report from AP is Iran has the nuke tech it needs.
The sad sacks in the White House need to take full blame. They were warned. They chose to ignore it. Heck, they chose to campaign against doing the right thing as Americans and ending politics at the water’s edge. They put personal ambition first, national security second. Now they are president, vice president and secretary of state.
The blood is on their hands now.
The Associated Press report in full:
VIENNA (AP)— 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.
The document drafted by senior officials at the International Atomic Energy Agency is the clearest indication yet that the agency’s leaders share Washington’s views on Iran’s weapon-making capabilities.
It appears to be the so-called “secret annex” on Iran’s nuclear program that Washington says is being withheld by the IAEA’s chief.
The document says Iran has “sufficient information” to build a bomb. It says Iran is likely to “overcome problems” on developing a delivery system.
http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/2009/09/...
You neglect to say that Bush tied our military down with a meaningless adventure in Iraq; and was commander in chief at that time.

It was Bush's neglect of reality, for his persuit of riches.
Doc

Modesto, CA

#39 Oct 5, 2009
Mr_Bill wrote:
<quoted text>
You neglect to say that Bush tied our military down with a meaningless adventure in Iraq; and was commander in chief at that time.
It was Bush's neglect of reality, for his persuit of riches.
That's kind of lame. 8 years of no attacks, taking down a dictator. What has the One done? Nothing. No transparency, no Olympics, devalued the dollar, hell, is is coming off as the worst President ever. He doesn't even speak to his generals? Why did Rome burn? You are living in a liberal fantasy.
Doc

Modesto, CA

#40 Oct 5, 2009
Do you read the news? The generals are coming out publically against him. That is a huge warning sign, that some dumb asses choose to forget. They are the ones who know how to fight wars, not some scrawny black kid from Chicago with no idea what is going on. He should take their advice and go with it. Or grab his nuts and bend over, which Americans never do.
Maybe in your world, Mr. Bill, not in mine.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Warsaw Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Laura Bitner (Jan '15) Oct 31 Nick 4
rudgers farm Oct 29 fk you allen 1
News Hunter shot by another hunter in Pavilion Oct 26 IescapedNY 14
good riddance Oct '17 ha ha ha 1
overdoses at house one fatal Sep '17 You knew 1
News Law and Order: Batavia woman accused of selling... Sep '17 mr nelson 1
News Anniversary of Penn Yan flooding (May '15) Aug '17 lakertaker 3

Warsaw Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Warsaw Mortgages