Why is GW Bush obsessed with a missile defense system?

[soapdish]

While you Bozos are blaming Republicans, need I remind that Clinton was FOR it!



Another Tominator "Truth" I guess.


Why the hell are you bringing Clinton in on this? Are you obsessed with the man or what? Get over the delusions of grandeur, and start living in the real world will ya?


Clinton did a cowardly thing, I grant you, and that is to defer to the next president the decision to support NMD. He inherited the desire for such a toy from military, and rather than kill it outright, since it was in direct violation of the 1972 ABM treaty, he passed the buck.

NMD will never work as intended. But that won't stop you lobotomized repubs from spending the world on it. The ironic fact is that, if built, you might be right, not because you are right in opinion, but because it will never be used.

You want new world order? Here it is. Work with thy neighbor and not against. Hell, even the North Koreans were coming around before Bush-lite took office. Now he wants to call them "Rogue" again. Well, there goes the progress of the last year of Clinton in easing North/South Korean relations.

What a jackoff, but then if tominator is good example of a typical "Bush" supporter, it is no wonder why.

Eat it and bleat like a sheep, Tom...

 

[K_Factor]

I honestly can't think of a good reason why anyone would be against a NMD system.
There are already a fair number of countries that have nukes, and that number will
only increase in the future. Many of these countries have unstable governments.

Think of a boxing match where the fighters cannot block. All they can do is stand toe to toe
and punch each other in the face until one fighter is hurt so badly that they cannot
continue. This is exactly what a nuclear war would be like WITHOUT a NMD system... Don't you think that it would be smart for a fighter to learn to block?

With a NMD system, at least one would have hope for survival in the unfortunate event that a nuclear missile was launched in agression. Without it, all you can do is take the hit and completely destroy the other guy.

 

[Wingznut]

Kfactor...

• Cost. There are many, many better things to spend money on.
• Necessity. Nobody is going to throw a nuke our way, knowing that we can send hundreds more their way. If someone truly is going to nuke us, it won't be by an ABM from across the ocean. It's going to be something much more concealed.
• Peace. We preach it, and how we should attempt to make peace with other nations. Why not act like it?
• Cold War. We don't need another one of those. It wasn't real fun, the first time.
• Cost. There are many, many better things to spend money on.

Besides, how does this even work financially. To give us tax breaks, AND increase spending... Something's gotta give. What programs are going to be gouged, to afford enlarging GW's penis?

 

[Tominator]

soapdish
Very apt name I might add.

If you can read, or are not otherwise impaired, the posts above mine all are bashing Republicans while some Democrats are for it as well.

Space travel, as you envision it, will be much more difficult than what Bush is proposing we do for a missle defense. I agree that if and when the technology is developed it should be shared.

We have a limited capability at present if the tracking and targeting is developed to a point it can be used on individual missles or warheads. At present, we cannot...

If you were in business with a company that was here to stay and did not suck hind tit, you would hear the top dogs saying EXACTLY what GW does. The future lies in what we will develope and not what we know at the present. Notice he did not start dumping dollars into the military as all the Democrats promised he would. He wants smarter and better, not more.

The Chinese have sold there most advanced rockets to Sadamm. They are brutally simple and capable of ballistic missle flight in near earth orbit. Now the Chinese have multiple rentry technology courtesy of Billy Boy. How long until it makes it's way to the likes of Sadamm?


...As far as another arms race...with who? Aliens maybe? No one else is a threat to the US in an arms race....destabilize? again ...who?

 

[Cyberian]

<< 1) Its damn expensive, and redundant in the face of good diplomacy.

2) Belief in a system is its own curse. What if it works fine in labs and test fires, but when it comes to real world practices, it misses. 10 million dead? Relying on NMD rather than good diplomacy is a bad idea.
>>



In a perfect world you would be 100% correct!
Unfortunately ..........

 

[UG]

The US knows who are its real friends. It knows who are its real enemies. It knows who pretends to be its friend while playing it against its enemies.

The day the US is nuked, it will act in due time on the targeting solutions that leave its real friends in charge of what's left of everyone else.

Nevermind. This is only a nationalistic rant that doesn't have any possible effect on anyone who presumes to laugh at impossibilities.

Why entertain rational solutions to irrational behaviors?

 

[Tominator]

I for one do not think we would retaliate if only one nuc were to hit....at least not in kind.

 

[XMan]

I for one do not think we would retaliate if only one nuc were to hit....at least not in kind.

I tend to disagree with you, Tominator. In fact, it is US Military Policy that all &quot;NBC&quot; agents - nuclear, biological, chemical - and are to be considered weapons of mass destruction. Any attack by a weapon of mass destruction on the United States would be met in kind - and we don't have biological or chemical weapons. I imagine that we'd have to have quite a bit of evidence before we'd act, but if, say, Osama Bin Ladin unleashed an anthrax outbreak in an American city, the Bekaa Valley would a circle of glass as soon as we had reliable information that he'd initiated the attack.