Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Rumsfeld Says U.S. Expects Limited Missile Defense by End of 2004

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-22-04 08:52 PM
Original message
Rumsfeld Says U.S. Expects Limited Missile Defense by End of 2004
By Jacquelyn S. Porth
Washington File Security Affairs Writer



Washington -- Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld says the United States expects to have a limited ability to defend against incoming long-range ballistic missiles by the end of 2004.

In remarks prepared for delivery to the seventh annual Space and Missile Defense Conference in Huntsville, Alabama, on August 18, Rumsfeld pointed out that the first ground-based missile interceptor was placed in its silo in Fort Greely, Alaska, on July 22, some two years after President Bush announced his decision to deploy an initial missile defense capability.

Disputing critics who claim that such defense capabilities are destabilizing, the secretary said "missile defense continues to be a means of building closer relations with allies like Japan, Italy, and Israel, as well as new friends and allies."

Instead of waiting to launch what he described as a fixed and final missile defense architecture, Rumsfeld said the United States is deploying only "an initial set of capabilities." In a follow-up session with reporters, he said it is not necessary to wait "to have something perfected." The notion, he said, is to evolve and test systems, to learn from that and to then make improvements. In addition, the capabilities of a missile defense system will improve with new technological advances, the secretary said.

more
http://tokyo.usembassy.gov/e/p/tp-20040823-06.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
soothsayer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-22-04 08:54 PM
Response to Original message
1. Great, cuz terra-ists use those. Oh, wait, no they don't. And besides
that star wars crap doesn't work. Guess that's the 'limited' part.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HawkerHurricane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-22-04 08:55 PM
Response to Original message
2. In related news...
North Korea, Iran, and Al-Queda members are all working on ways to smuggle nuclear weapons by hiding them in boxes of cocaine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-22-04 09:28 PM
Response to Reply #2
10. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
iconoclastic cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-22-04 08:56 PM
Response to Original message
3. Limited by reason, limited by lack of a budget, limited by crap technology
limited by the fantasy world of the neocons...

I, for one, am glad for the limits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasProgresive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-22-04 08:57 PM
Response to Original message
4. Limited OK
Like maybe these ABM's could hit their target it the enemy gave advanced coordinates and targeting information. This is the biggest boondoggle since RayGun foisted antique battleships and that lovely fire trap of a bomber, the B-1 on us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zynx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-22-04 10:08 PM
Response to Reply #4
13. The battleships are not as bad as the B-1 and ABM system
For one, they actually work the way they are supposed to-destroy anything and everything within 20 miles of the coast. Plus they were actually a fairly cheap and fast way of adding additional cruise missile cruisers.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HEFFA Donating Member (414 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-22-04 09:02 PM
Response to Original message
5. Have you ever heard David Cross describe missile defense?
It's priceless and more than a little bit accurate.

"Well... since you really wanna know... quite simply... the missile defense shield is a net, made of magic, held in place by pixies"

And it costs a LOT of money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StandUpGuy Donating Member (392 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-22-04 09:07 PM
Response to Original message
6. wasn't it set for deployment in October !!!
isn't this new date proof it isn't ready and doesn't work?

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/9/24/224103.shtml

snip

A newly released General Accounting Office report has found that the administration's decision to field a ballistic missile defense system in October 2004 means that the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) must take a higher risk approach to development, integrating systems before their maturity was proven.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jimshoes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-22-04 09:07 PM
Response to Original message
7. I'm fairly sure you're going to be unemployed
around then Don, you ought to be looking up some of your old CEO buds you've been making rich these last few years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabasco Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-22-04 09:17 PM
Response to Original message
8. This is the greatest scam of all time.
This system does nothing for our national security. Most of the hundreds of billions spent on Star Wars will end up in CEO bank accounts. Nothing but a tool to steal taxpayer money and funnel it to neocon ruling elite. This is money that will not be available for real needs, like port security or a light infantry division for the Army. This is treasonous profiteering. WAKE UP AMERICANS BEFORE YOU ARE SERFS !
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
T Roosevelt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-22-04 09:19 PM
Response to Original message
9. I believe him
oh...you mean working? Well, that's a different story...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-22-04 09:31 PM
Response to Original message
11. The bush* administration has elevated the ability to openly steal from
the American people to a fine art form. What they can't steal outright, the appropriate for the war in Iraq, and then they sneak all the money out of there.

God bless America, the country where 40% of the public doesn't mind the futures of their children and grandchildren being pulled out from under them, like the old magician's trick of pulling a table cloth out from under the place settings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PATRICK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-22-04 09:55 PM
Response to Original message
12. They expecting something?
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-22-04 10:09 PM
Response to Original message
14. Damned right it's "limited"
It doesn't fucking work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
General Zod Donating Member (652 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-22-04 10:22 PM
Response to Original message
15. This does nothing to make us safer....
....In fact, the new ABM system makes us less safe. What incentive do the Russians have to remove MIRVs or Multiple Independently Targetable Re-entry vehicles from their ICBMs? The last START treaty banned MIRVs and limited all ICBMs to 1 warhead per missile. Since we were the one who broke the ABM treaty, why should we expect Russia to abide by START? The system we have deployed is a joke.
It can easily be overwhelmed by multiple warheads and it does nothing to protect us from cruise missile attack, let alone nukes smuggled in by terrorists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mnemosyne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-23-04 06:48 AM
Response to Original message
16. HAARP, be afraid, very afraid, check out Tesla. n/t
Edited on Mon Aug-23-04 06:50 AM by vickiss
Hello Seems, any word from Haiti yet? Take good care.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-23-04 07:40 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. Hi vickiss, Haiti was on my mind last night
in post #21 here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=769656



HAARP, that silly little thing way up in Alaska? Now what would they do with that? :evilfrown:

:hi: and still missing Tinoire
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malachi Donating Member (653 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-23-04 08:53 AM
Response to Original message
18. If you needed any further evidence to prove that rummy
is a stone feckin' idgit, this article should suffice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-23-04 09:04 AM
Response to Original message
19. Great, so when we're all laid off w/o health insurance . . .
. . . and our votes are electronically disappeared, and Rupert Murdoch controls the news, and McDonalds provides our kids' school lunches, and prescription drugs rise at double digits year after year, and the draft comes back, and we invade Iran and oil hits $70 a barrel, WE CAN ALL FEEL SAFE!!

Thanks for all the hard work, Rummy - you steaming lying mound of gibbon shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kool Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-23-04 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
20. Donald, I don't know how to break it to you but-
IT DOES NOT WORK. How does this make us safer from terrorism? It doesn't. Now start spending the money on something that does work, like food, ammo, and a couple more bullet-proof vests for the troops, 'kay? (And throw in some health insurance and benefits for the veterans, too, while you're at it.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
daleo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-23-04 12:28 PM
Response to Original message
21. "Limited" to missiles with beacons shouting "shoot me down"
Even then, the chances of making a hit are very slim.

"he (Rummy) said it is not necessary to wait "to have something perfected.""

In this case it is important that it be perfected. Deploying a leaky missile shield just causes other countries to build (and launch if it ever comes to that) more missiles to overwhelm it, and encourages a false sense of security among politicians. So it is worse than useless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 07:12 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC