|
||
Defending Against the Real Threats
Republicans in Congress, led by their presidential candidate John McCain, are attempting to show the world that they are capable of reacting swiftly to Russian saber-rattling. Unfortunately, they are once again doing so in a manner that reflects their complete misunderstanding of the threats the United States and our allies face.
Today in Warsaw, Secretary Rice signed an agreement to expedite the construction of ten long range missile interceptors in Poland. These same Republicans have mistakenly conflated this pact with Russian provocation in Georgia and misrepresented this missile defense system as a protection against further Russian aggression.
The problem is, this system would be virtually useless to prevent any Russian attack considering the interceptors would be easily outnumbered by the Russian missile arsenal. Belligerent Russian rhetoric in response to this pact should be treated as unfortunate hyperventilation, but should not be given serious credence. What this Republican conflation does is tell the world that it is enough to seem like you are protecting your allies, whether or not you are doing anything to address the real threats they face.
The U.S. and Russia have serious issues that need to be discussed, such as full Russian redeployment from Georgian territory, negotiating a follow-on treaty to START, and reining in Iran's nuclear program. Equally belligerent rhetoric by McCain and his neocon acolytes does nothing to protect us, and just adds fuel to the fire.
Right now, addressing existing short and medium range missile threats needs to be the focus of the United States and our NATO allies. I take our commitment to NATO's Article Five very seriously, and it is in this vein that we should be delivering Poland the systems they need to protect against very real short range missile threats.
Although today's pact seems to incorporate some of these defenses, the main outcome is that the Bush Administration will move aggressively to dig holes in Eastern Europe to build an ideologically-based system that is untested and certainly not ready, against a threat that has not yet emerged. We need a system that works today, against the threats of today. Congress holds the purse strings, and we will continue to insist that that we have both independent analysis of missile defense options and that the Secretary of Defense certifies the system actually works.
Of course John McCain, who hopes to soon begin George Bush's third term, has relished the opportunity to rehash Reagan-era Star Wars rhetoric about Imperial Russia. In today's asymmetric War on Terror, he seems about as current as Dr. Strangelove.
Democrats are committed to addressing real threats in real time with the right systems, not just by playing lip service and feeding into a rhetorical frenzy that can produce policies that are misguided, and rushed.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Oh, goodie. Another fight. Can't wait. Let's jump on it. Put missiles in Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Belarus, Ukraine. Then wonder why the Russians are feeling a little paranoid.
And why is Georgia (birthplace of Stalin) , etc. considered for NATO and not Russia? No wonder they feel a bit ostracized, in spite of Bush's expression of brotherly love towards Putin -- after looking into his eyes deeply, or some such !@#$.
Liberal olympics: A competition to see who can wave the white flag first, fastest, and most often.
Didn't the BushCo defeatacans just agreed to a time line?
Yep, after mopping up things over the last 12 months.
Here's the difference, the republicans actually had the stones to join the fight. The left laid down 3 weeks after 9/11, and covered themselves in the white flag from day one in Iraq.
What are the chances that if Dems. come to power, the Polish installations will be dismantled. That's right--- ZERO.
Scoring points against McCain is fine, but the people who run BOTH parties strongly support American hegemony. And If they didn't, they wouldn't be in the leadership position. So please, lets not muddle the issue here. The people deserve more honesty from their representatives ( pun intended).
Since the likelihood of a false firing of these missiles, on a commercial airline, is more than likely, perhaps Obama will wisely remove them.
Sorry to disagree for a couple of reasons. One, the US would freak out if Russia was installing a similar number of systems in Cuba. Two, I'm certain Putin realizes these 10 interceptors couldn't stop an attack but it establishes a precedent. It's only 10 missiles now, but it could 20 somewhere else, 50 over here and then 100 over there and pretty soon they're surrounded with missiles. Unlike our President, Putin is no fool. He knows whats going to happen if he says or does nothing about this.
The USA and McCain deliberately caused this war.
Did you know about the USA and Israel arming and training the Georgians?
Did the USA, McCain and his adviser encourage Georgia to use the weapons and training it had gotten just weeks before to attack Ossitia?
The Russians we invited as peacekeepers by the Ossetians. No doubt Russians noticed the USA training exercise in Ossitia just weeks before, and thus was fully prepared with it's troops on the Russian Ossitia border.
Have you looked up the History of Ossitia? Do you know that Stalin grouped Ossitia with Georgia?
Do you know that when the USSR broke up, Ossitia also claimed it's independence?
Do you know that the anti-missile system this Deliberate US client state war allowed us to sell to Poland, is faulty, and likely to shoot down a Russian airliner?
Why won't the Democrats condemn Georgia foolish deadly attack on Ossitia after agreeing to a cease fire?
Why won't you impeach Bush and Cheney and end their PNAC inspired war mongering?
Yes, putting missiles on Russian border will make the world safer....Really?
After insisting for years that this was strictly to defend against Iran. I recall Rice saying it was "ludicrous" for Russians to concern themselves with it. And now both Democrat and Republicans are crowing about Russian "provocative" behavior against Poland. Brezinski, chief foreign policy adviser of our Democratic nominee is again on the crusade against " the Russian Bear." Image what would happen if Zbig gets a post in new administration?! Is there a difference between Democratic and Republican Imperial pretensions? Only in minor details.
Depends what kind of missles . . . if it is a missle shield I don't se the problem other than Russia has always been easily angered.
Let's see what happens when Russia opens a few naval bases in Venezuela and Cuba. Perhaps just a few missile installations also.To protect South America against , eh, potential terrorist aggression.
Maybe also one missile base in Baja, Mexico. After financing Mexican Anti-American regime to power.
Glad you have no problem with that.
No one in his right mind sees this "defensive" shield as anything but an opener for extension of a much stronger military force next to Russia.
After Napoleon and Hitler, the Russians can be excused for worrying about attacks from the west, and the administration's apparent ignorance of this is astounding.
But Russia isn't reacting out of mere historical experience. Bush has claimed the right to make preemptive strikes , presumably based on information supplied by our vaunted intelligence services.
Plus, we're working on "theater" nuclear weapons, presumably to back up our numerically weak army. That should make all the world's nations nervous, it's a far more frightening statement than anything the Iranians have ever issued.
Russia does not need to use missiles to invade any country in Europe that borders them or is close to their borders. Russia has the man power , planes and tanks to take over and control any or all of them.
therefore the missile defense system is a joke and just another way to keep the World in turmoil so that the Military-Industrial-Complex can continue to make large, gross profits.
"The U.S. and Russia have serious issues that need to be discussed, such as full Russian redeployment from Georgian territory, negotiating a follow-on treaty to START, and reining in Iran's nuclear program"
While unjustifiably attacking Republican belligerence on one hand, Rep. Tauscher falls prey to typically American narrow vision of the relationship. The "serious issues" ALL include the issues beneficial to U.S. NO issues of concern to Russia are listed. But one can seriously participate in a dialog based on issues that are important to both sides. The above list should include: the NATO expansion, U.S. unilateral exit from various strategic treaties; surrounding of Russia by U.S.military bases in Europe and Asia; Kosovo; Iraq; funding of Anti-Russian propaganda; the support of Georgian aggression; the subversion of Russia's neighbor governments etc.
Sorry.... I meant "justifiably" in sentence one.
We've seen the depths that neocon chicanery can take to drum the Iraq war. It gave them war powers and 7 yrs. scare you to death taliking points. Why would we think it a stretch that they would dupe Georgia into invading S. Occetia in the middle of the night? Our people(military and political)were there for the 2 weeks preceding the Georgia invasion, Bush went to the Olympics, Saaksvilli called out Mccane for the support that he seemed to think was supposed to be coming. Alas, the neoconmen only wanted some scare you to death talking points. At least, there were no Americans killed for the repubic neoconmen, this time, so far.
Can you invade something that is in your country?
What we need is a new, powerful Communist adversary as a global balance.
America was a faaaarrrr better place when Capitalism had competition. As soon as the wall fell, the Neoliberals in Washington took away the "Democracy floor-model" and replaced it with a brutal, apathetic corporate-fascist empire the Neoliberals had developed decades ago and put on on ice waiting to spring the bait-n-switch on Americans. Now, we have only slavery and war and this country turned into a miserable cess-pool ruled by business oligarchs.
Bring back America so I don't have to pick up and move to a *free* country, please.
Typical Blue-Dogism. Agree with 90 % of any given Republican (neocon) bad idea, and call it a centrist position to insist on scaling back the bad idea by 10%. Did it ever occur to you to question the wisdom of adding more weapons into an already over-weaponized region? And why is it that the US is making this commitment? Do we have the resources to spare? I don't. We're up to our eyebrows in red ink, and vastly over extended to begin with. Stand DOWN!
The "threat" that the Republicans worry about is from voters.
Rep Tauscher
You clearly realize the limitations of the long-range missile defense system, but you underestimate the commitment made by just about every nation to short-range missile defense. Short range missile defense systems are widely deployed, and who knows, some of them might even work!
The issue with long and interim-range missiles is the asymmetrical nature of the engagement. An interceptor system must be significantly superior to the system it is countering.
The proposed Poland-based missile defense system may be quite effective at countering a fairly limited strike with relatively few missiles and relatively low levels of ECM, as might be expected from an Iranian strike. Where it might be highly effective is in an anti-aircraft role, which is probably Russia's major gripe: if the US missile technology is significantly superior then it might more then offset any other advantage Russia enjoys.
I agree with you - "Republicans have mistakenly conflated this pact with Russian provocation in Georgia and misrepresented this missile defense system as a protection against further Russian aggression." It was a foolish thing to do, and Russia is being just as reactionary. If it continues we can expect progressively more extreme positions to be occupied until we end up fighting indefensible positions.
Good luck finding an "independent analysis of missile defense options".
I can assure you that the Secretary of Defense will certify the system actually works - it is hardly worth the bother of asking him.
"I take our commitment to NATO's Article Five very seriously, and it is in this vein that we should be delivering Poland the systems they need to protect against very real short range missile threats."
Congresswoman Tauscher, this line in your posting makes everything else you say into incoherent nonsense.
Nothing would be more provocative than to start putting MORE missiles right up to the Russian border, in response to yet another un-materialized "threat." It will validate the already credible notion that our "defensive shield" is merely prelude to a much larger "defensive" shied in the same location.
Yes, anyone with any sense knows that the Polish and Czech missiles are merely a first step to the re-nuclearization of Europe, unprovoked, by US. Iran has no ICBMs and the idea that would lunch them against nuclear France is as absurd as your suggestion for putting more missiles in Poland.
I hope the peoples of Europe rise up against this insane neocon policy, and that the people of your district vote you and other warmongers imbedded in the Democratic party into shared obscurity with John Bolton and Don Rumsfeld.
So liberals want to pursue the same policies they used to allow the soviet union to gobble up countries before and after WWII?
Those who forget their history are condemned to repeat it.
Those who don't understand history will be forever in the dark.
THE BIGGEST THREAT? Is having Republicans in charge ALL OVER AGAIN!
MCBUSH will happen if McCain's elected and then WATCH YOUR BACK, folks.
Because the RICH WANT TO GET RICHER--AT YOUR EXPENSE.
Republicans want a PERMANENT WAR ECONOMY that enriches rich, corrupt profiteer corporations. While stealing from middle-income Americans.
Vote the way your stupid neighbors will, don't use common sense and have fun enjoying your CRASHED STANDARD OF LIVING for the next 8 years! hahahahahaaaaaa...
The Russian Federation is not the USSR, we have to stop thinking in "templates" and examine the actual situation.
This is not Russia invading Czechoslovakia to maintain order the Iron Curtain, it's a series of provocations by the US to extend NATO right up to Russia's borders, breaking a very clear promise we made to them when they took down the Wall, dissolved the Warsaw Pact and pulled their large forces back eastward from their OWN BORDERS.
"Their own borders", which is where they should have stayed, instead of crossing over into georgia.
Tough not to fit something into a template, when Putin's policies fit so well into the old soviet template.
What if, just what if, Russia's neighbors are choosing or already chose freedom and democracy over the remnants (or renewal) of mother russia's soviet tendencies?
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
