Theater & Continental Balistic Missile Defence . . . and Canada

[Blue Max]

Sub_Guy,
actually Yes, I think the US govt would go out of their way to fly reporters into some remote frozen region of Alaska and show any number of news outlets that would be climbing all over each other to get the pictures and write a story about the first enemy offensive weapon to hit N. America in over 50yrs.

If for no other reason than that the spin on this story would most certainly pull the rug out from any American tax payers/critics that were questioning the need for a BMD system.

So without any corraboration from other news sources, MHO is that the story is BS.

WADR,

B M.

 

[George Wallace]

This is very faulty logic George.
Infantry is cost effective and works. There is no comparison.

BULL

What is faulty about it?  How long did it take to make modern Infantry with 'Black Powder' effective?
What is cost effective, if only one of.....let's say...fifty, can hit his mark.  Lots of wasted bullets....no?

What I am trying to get across to you is that: Every weapons system we have developed, has gone through serious growing pains in its development.  Why are you expecting this system to be any different?  Do you have some kind of inside information that we don't have?

GW

 

[muskrat89]

Missile defence is a waste of time and money. It does nothing but provide the scared american people with a false sense of security.

That's a pretty interesting comment. How do you know that the American people are scared? I live with 2 million of them, right here in good ol Phoenix, and I haven't met anyone yet who is "scared"...

 

[old medic]

BULL

What is faulty about it?
GW

Not Bull,

You can't compare conventional low cost items (infantry) with high cost R&D maybes. Especially when the R&D budget is nearly five times bigger than Canada's whole defence budget.

 

[old medic]

Gee some of you guys have logic that really escapes me!

GW

If we want to talk logic,  The public said no.
This is a democracy.....

Therefore, No BMD.

No number of postings on army.ca will ever change that.

 

[George Wallace]

Obviously my opinion of BMD is different from yours; my elegies don't make any sense to you; so I will stop pounding my head against the ole brick wall and carry on.  I think the BMD is actually a NON ISSUE.  We are members of NORAD.  It was created for Missile and Bomber detection, warning and interception.  As that is a fact, what is the big deal?  All of a sudden some Liberal Left Leaning Weenies found out what we do?  They are upset that we want to improve?  You get no pity from me if you want to go through life like that.  I believe in a strong Defence and the development of systems that will guarantee that.

Roll over if you want to.  I don't intend to.

GW

 

[old medic]

.  I think the BMD is actually a NON ISSUE.  We are members of NORAD.  It was created for Missile and Bomber detection, warning and interception.  As that is a fact, what is the big deal?

GW

I'm not arguing that George. In fact, it seems to be some of the right wing conservatives who fail to grasp that point when
they talk about the U.S. phoning Mr. Dithers to ask about shooting down a missile.  It seems many people fail to grasp the fact
this consultation has been in place for the longest time.

Cheers

 

[Sub_Guy]

You haven't met any scared americans, just ask them about terrorism.... I met quite a few when I was in Seattle, they were afraid of the Ferries being targets, and suggested that boarding the ferry should be the same as a plane.....


I can't turn on any american news channel with out being told what the terror level is, sure they say they are not, but you know what, the bush government is thriving on the fear of the average american. 

 

[muskrat89]

Got me - I can see where "meeting a few in Seattle" would  trump actually living here for 15 years.

The evening news is hardly representative of what most people think, either.

I disagree that the Bush Government is thriving on fear, also... if anything, Americans are indifferent.

Anyway, it appears that your mind is made up, so I'll let you get back to the thread.

Cheers

 

[48Highlander]

You can't compare conventional low cost items (infantry) with high cost R&D maybes. Especially when the R&D budget is nearly five times bigger than Canada's whole defence budget.

High cost R&D maybes eh?  Like the research in atomic weapons?  Or maybe like the development of ground to air and air to air missiles?  Or how about the development of stealth aircraft?  Go look up the budgets for any of those technologies, and you'll see how much t cos to develop all the other "technological maybes" which we now take for granted.

 

[dutchie]

You haven't met any scared americans, just ask them about terrorism.... I met quite a few when I was in Seattle, they were afraid of the Ferries being targets, and suggested that boarding the ferry should be the same as a plane.....
I can't turn on any american news channel with out being told what the terror level is, sure they say they are not, but you know what, the bush government is thriving on the fear of the average american.  

:boring:
Why does every thread that has anything to do with the US, it's military, or it's policies turn into a debate on Bush, with plenty on Chomsky, Moore, Carlson, et al quotes and references? There is a TON we could discuss re:BMD that has nothing to do with Bush's policy in the middle east or the GWOT. The idea (BMD) has been around for decades, as has the controvesy over whether it works or not.

If you want to discus Bush, fear mongering, Iraq, WMD, GWOT, WW4, or how great/evil the US is, there are plenty of other threads, or you can start a new one.

THIS one is dedicated to BMD.

 

[old medic]

High cost R&D maybes eh?  Like the research in atomic weapons?  Or maybe like the development of ground to air and air to air missiles?  Or how about the development of stealth aircraft?  Go look up the budgets for any of those technologies, and you'll see how much t cos to develop all the other "technological maybes" which we now take for granted.

_We_ take for granted ?
How many of those things did Canada develop ?
How many of those things does Canada have ?

 

[old medic]

Frankly,

We've already had several threads combined into this one, which has turned into a 25 page monster.
It's not likely we're all going to arrive at a happy consensus, so we're likely to have another 25 pages
worth of "yes" vs. "no".

 

[48Highlander]

_We_ take for granted ?
How many of those things did Canada develop ?
How many of those things does Canada have ?

Well we have and build our own nuclear reactors, and we have plenty of missiles of all sorts.  What the hell's the point of your queston anyway?  Are we being asked to build a BM shield?  No.  So what's your point?  The US will foot the bill, just like they did for every other pricey project.  And the world as a whole will make use of it just as we always have.

 

[Jungle]

The US has had in place for a long time US officers who are shadows of Canadian officers in NORAD who can step in to replace their counterparts. This has been necessary with the increasingly unreliability of Canadian governments.

That phrase sums it up... So we have Officers serving there, who do not have the authority to carry out their duties. So they are "shadowed" by US Officers to ensure continuity in times of crisis... Is NORAD becoming a unilateral alliance ?? How much longer before we are told to leave ??
Apparently, our PM has been trying to reach Mr Bush for 5 days, but they are not answering the phone. Looks like they have caller ID...  Well, I don't blame them, when I have an annoying neighbour, I try to avoid him too. 
Agree with BMD or not, I hope we are ready to pay whatever price comes from our decision.

"Together we stand, divided we fall" and these days, the enemy is not south of the border...

 

[Blue Max]

If we want to talk logic,   The public said no.
This is a democracy.....

Therefore, No BMD.

Actually Old Medic, the public and our parliament were not consulted. The Liberal caucus probably, maybe on Mr Dithers, made a decision, mostly based on:
1. Minority govt status.
2. Losing votes in Quebec.
3. Liberal womens caucus threatening not to support Mr Dithers in upcoming Liberal convention.
4. God knows what else went through Mr Dithers head because he did not consult with Parliament.

So NO, this was not a democratic decision based on solid foreign policy that was well thought out as being GOOD for Canada. Only good for Liberals.

B M.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Which brings up a good point, wouldn't something like this be put to a vote in the commons?

 

[Blue Max]

Why is it that people are opposed to BMD, when no one is apposed to NORAD, with air to air and potentially grount to air intercepts. We pay for NORAD, but we were not asked to contribute one dime for BMD.

"The fact that slaughter is a horrifying spectacle must make us take war more seriously, but not provide an excuse for gradually blunting our swords in the name of humanity. Sooner or later someone will come along with a sharp sword and hack off our arms."
~ Carl von Clausewitz (1780-1831)

Blue Max.

 

[Blue Max]

Bruce, I don't think that Canada is as democratic as we think or would like unfortunately.

Blue Max

 

[LF(CMO)]

Apparently, our PM has been trying to reach Mr Bush for 5 days, but they are not answering the phone. Looks like they have caller ID...   Well, I don't blame them, when I have an annoying neighbour, I try to avoid him too.  
Agree with BMD or not, I hope we are ready to pay whatever price comes from our decision.


 The above pretty well sums it up for me!