The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Obama’s missile defence change shows different targets > Comments

Obama’s missile defence change shows different targets : Comments

By Tomas Valasek, published 28/9/2009

Will the scrapped missile defence base soothe or incite Russia while defending against the Iranian threat?

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. All
Having largely depleted its own internal sources of hydrocarbon energy and now being dependent on foreigners for both finance and oil, the US star is waning. Russia oil production also recently peaked but, with an enormous border to the rest of Europe and with considerable remaining supplies, the Russian superpower will dominate European strategic thinking in future (since Europe is so dependent on Russia for gas as well as oil). As to the Iranian "threat" the following comment from a peak oil discussion group may be of interest:

"Just in case anyone hasn't grasped the background to the legality or otherwise of the "new" Iranian enrichment facility :
in 2006 the Iranians agreed to an Additional Protocol to its IAEA commitments under which they would suspend enrichment and accept tighter reporting standards while they talked to their enemies about a more permanent solution.

But the US refused to talk to them unless they first gave up enrichment entirely, which they were never prepared to do, and the US persuaded the Europeans (UK, France and Germany) to not talk either, so after 6 months the Iranians said, "Well if you won't talk to us, then we will drop the Additional Protocol." and when they announced that it was dropped, the Europeans said, "No, you can't do that, you are breaking the rules you agreed to, and the Iranians said, "Tough."

(continued in next comment)
Posted by michael_in_adelaide, Monday, 28 September 2009 10:11:15 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
(continued from previous comment)

So now the facility they are building at Qom is at the stage where it is 6 months away from having nuclear material on site, and it needs to be reported under the old, less strict reporting rules, and so the Iranians have reported it to the IAEA. Whereupon the US and Europe say that under the rules (their rules) this should have been reported ages ago and this is proof that the nasty Iranians are cheating.

But they are not cheating under the rules given that the Additional Protocol lapsed 3 years ago. And the IAEA still says they have found no evidence of any weapons program, and the US still can't come up with any proof other than the stuff the CIA/Mossad made up about coming from a laptop in Germany.

Obama is EXACTLY the same as Bush on this.
If ever you needed proof that he uses the same lies and distortion as Bush, this is it.

There is also a distortion going on in the western media on the Russian stance on further sanctions. Medvedev said (according to his own Ria Novosti) that the P5+1 shouldn't go into the talks with Iran having given up their trump card (further sanctions).

NOT that they are considering allowing further sanctions to be applied. Subtle difference - well not so subtle for Russians.

It's no wonder most people, who don't realise the torrents of crap coming from their "free" media don't understand what's going on."
Posted by michael_in_adelaide, Monday, 28 September 2009 10:12:10 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
michael_in_adelaide,

Could you please provide a source for the "comment from a peak oil discussion group" regarding Iran. I would like to read further on this. Also, could you provide further detail on the "CIA/Mossad... laptop in Germany"

Cheers
Posted by Stezza, Monday, 28 September 2009 10:46:41 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Tomas Valasek wrote 28 September 2009:

>Washington rankled some of its European allies and delighted Moscow
> ... cancelled plans to build missile defence bases ...

The US decision to reply on a ship-borne anti-missile system in place of fixed bases in Europe has military and political advantages.

The Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System, installed on some US, Japanese (and perhaps soon Australian) warships, has proven reasonably successful in tests: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aegis_Ballistic_Missile_Defense_System

The ships can be easily moved where required, in response to military or political requirements, which cannot be done with fixed land based missiles. Unlike land based missiles, the ships can be placed off the coast of a friendly country as a gesture of support, or off that of an enemy, as a threat.

Because the ships are multi-use, their mission can be ambiguous, when required for military or political purposes. A ship can be on a "training exercise" and, with the turn of a few keys, be ready to shoot down ballistic missiles.

ps: Australia has ordered three Spanish Air Warfare Destroyers capable of launching the same anti-ballistic missiles used by US and Japanese warships. A decision has not been made to order the missiles: http://www.tomw.net.au/blog/2007/03/hitech-spanish-warship-in-sydney-for.html
Posted by tomw, Monday, 28 September 2009 10:48:14 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Stezza,

The comment comes from this peak oil discussion group:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/roeoz/

See also the article by Ritter in the Guardian:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/sep/25/iran-secret-nuclear-plant-inspections

Discussion of the laptop can be found here:

http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=41416
Posted by michael_in_adelaide, Tuesday, 29 September 2009 11:47:20 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy