Bush Cancels ABM Treaty

Bush is a clueless cunt, he seems to be systematically undoing what previous Presidents have accomplished; most significantly, many of his decisions are simply knee-jerk reactions based on fear. Regarding the "Bin Laden" video, I wrote (another) article on this subject....

"Art of War and Deception"

The current conflict in Afghanistan seems to have evolved into a war of misinformation and media manipulation. Such propaganda is pervasive in the statements, actions and coverage of the crisis by both coalition agencies as well as those sympathetic to the goals of Al-Qaeda. As a result, a propaganda war is being waged on a global scale. In statements and interviews, bin Laden has called on Muslims to join a worldwide jihad, or holy war, against "Jews and crusaders" led by the coalition forces. The United States and its allies, meanwhile, have sought to neutralize bin Laden's appeal by reaching out to moderates in the Muslim world and depicting the conflict as a war against international terrorism rather than against Islam. The latest “Bin Laden” video release is no exception to the possibility of media deception, as many view this broadcast as conclusive “evidence” that the Saudi born zealot is personally responsible for the wave of attacks that took place on September 11. In contrast, I was under the impression that in the civilized world we have a judicial system, and evidence is evaluated in court of law and a verdict is delivered. Nevertheless, the US seems intent on a “trial by media”, thereby undermining the fundamental principles of social consciousness and justice. Such an action would seem to substantiate the belief that US has its own agenda and changes its foreign policy accordingly. As a final thought, the quality of picture and sound in the latest video are poor, yet none of the other Bin laden videos we have seen share this trait. Given the US authorities' policy of constantly hiding stories of their own casualties (both in Afghanistan and during the Gulf War) it is not unreasonable to believe this alleged Bin Laden video has been cooked up in some Hollywood studio with look-alikes or computer generated characters.

Why defensive weapons can be bad

The reason making defensive weapons could spark an arms race is this: each side has weapons that could destroy the other. So each side is unwilling to use their weapons, and cannot threaten to use their weapons offensively, because they would be destroyed in return.

If one side has a defensive weapon that renders the other side's offensive weapons useless, then the side with the "shield" is now free to use their offensive weapons with impunity. Even if they don't, if there is distrust between the two sides, the side without the sheild will feel threatened. If that side doesn't have the technology or money to make a sheild of their own, their only option is to try to overwhelm the "shielded" side's defenses with so many offensive weapons that their sheild won't stand it.

What do we end up with: a buildup of offensive weapons on one side, which can then be matched by another buildup from the other side.

We have an arms race.

What we have been working on for the past 30 years is a reduction in ICMBs. We enough nuclear weapons to destroy the world many times over (at least we had that during the cold war, we probably still have enough to destroy the world a couple of times). So all this surplus of nukes that may be built to overwhelm a MDS (just for "assurance" of course) is there simply to be able to overwhelm the shield in case the US tries to do something funny, from China's point of view.

Of course all this reasoning requires one thing: you have to look at the situation from another country's point of view. Some people do that, some don't, some do but they say "well, I'm on my side, and I'm looking out for myself, it's us against them". Some people will just say this reasoning is wrong because one side is "evil" and the other side is "good". Of course from the other side's point of view (the guys who will make lots of ICBMs to "defend" against our sheild) things look the opposite, they know they're the good guys and they may be weary of us.


The other problem with the MDS is this:
It just doesn't take a missile to cause a lot of damage. It doesn't even take a missile to put a nuke in our borders. Making missiles is extremely hard, and there are no rogue nations right now that can make an ICBM that has enough 1) range and 2) accuracy. They don't call it rocket science for nothing.

Launching a missiles has several disadvantages: if a rogue nation launched a missile, they would instantaneously point the finger at themselves. There is no doubt as to who did the crime. War would be easily waged against them. Furthermore, one missile has a chance of failue, and I doubt the first missile a rogue nation launches would have any accuracy. Anyway the point is moot, because it would make sense to launch it in the first place: it would be an instant death sentence to them.

Does that mean that these rogue nations would never be willing to nuke the US? Of course not, they might very well be willing to do it, and they might even try. I just don't think a missile would be very effective at all.

It would be a *lot* more effective to smuggle a nuke in pieces to the US, and detonate it without using a missile.

The advantages is that you don't instantly claim responsability by launching it, and you don't take the chance that your one single ICMB will actually work and be accurate. It would also be a LOT cheaper.

An unthinkable amount of illegal drugs gets into the US ever year. The DEA estimates that they catch maybe 10%, probably a lot less. The odds of being able to smuggle a nuke is very high.


Other possibilities...

You don't even need nukes to do terrorism. You can just crash planes. Or trains. Or collapse structures. Or stage assasinations of high-profile figures.

Man, if clinton wasn't such an idiot and eliminated bin laden before he did the WTC we wouldn't have to deal with this crap. Too bad he's a wimp. Clinton is the biggest ass beyond belief leaving bush to clean up all this mess.

Why were my 2 previous posts removed?

I don't understand this people... are we celebrating creating another arms race? Don't you people remember how bad it was in the 70's and 80's?

So instead of building a new future we're back on feudalistic terms... this is my castle and these are my deterrants... bloody hell, you would've supposed that most people would've understood the message... in a globalized world war is no longer conducted against massive numbers of missiles... it's against smaller more mobile enemies... or do expect seriously, that having more missiles is gonna improve terrorism?

Or that Iraq will try to nuke the US? That's preposterous...

And I seriously resent that my views are being silenced because I don't agree with pulling out of the ABM treaty. And I think Bush has done another disservice to America by sweeping this under the rug using 9/11 as a distraction.

I'm disgusted guys, I'm seriously disgusted

Future attacks aren't going to be in the form of missles.

Take Sept11, which claimed 3000+ lives by using US planes, the ongoing Anthrax letters, and look at the terror it ensued, which were without a doubt absolutely disgusting acts.

Suitcase nukes, biological warfare, etc... take your pick, they don't have to be delivered using a missle.

what a waste of money. With that amount of money you could take a small country out of debt, put an end to hunger in some countries.

Congratulations, the US elected a moron as a president.

- B

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/bush_privilege011213.html

Fun,fun,fun

I think icbms could prove very usefull in defending us against small threats. Right now, if a small group starts acting up and we want to launch cruise missles at them, we have to steam up a battle ship group and send it all the way to within range. ICBM doesnt necessarily mean nukes.With an icbm we can counter attack in minutes. ICBM doesnt necessarily mean nukes, either. And with gps (gps was created to guide icbms btw) combined with visual guidance systems, we could drop a conventional warhead into a mailbox.

So, how is making it harder for another country to successfully attack us with ICBM's a bad thing?

Really now, are we supposed to respect the opinions of other nations (whose ICBM's were built to attack us) when it comes to determining what is best for our own defense? Do you really expect China, Russia, or any other nation to have the United States best interests at heart in this matter? Think about that one for a minute. Think hard.

Where it up to me, in the best of all possible worlds, I'd have us ignore the rest of the world, de-arm, & go about our business in peace. Unfortunately, that has not been possible for a long, long, time now. That being the case, I'd prefer to see us attempt to be ready to counter & defeat any foe. It is not a friendly world. We would be wise to remember that as a nation.

I cannot believe (well, this being the Shack I guess I can) some of the utter garbage I've seen posted in this topic today. I'm disgustipated.

aside from this having little to do with gaming, its important to note. Its disipicable that our president thinks this is in our best interests, and its apparent that he's (the bush house) ashamed of it (it seems like his cabinet knows its bad, but there isnt any way to detur the president from doing it, so i guess they did it for him, quietly)

if this video now shows PROOF without a doubt that ossama bin pelican is the culprit, then why didnt they show us the original "evidance" that started this war with the Taliban? And now that we have this evidance, will the taliban give him up and surrender once and for all, even if it is a little too late?

our government is such an asshole.

Does anyone else think this Missile Defense program is going to be an expensive and fantastic failure? :P I have a feeling it's going to suck up billions, and produce very little :P

Oh well. Whatever.

Sheesus..
Reading all of this is like suffering from VD, IT HURTS TO PEE!!
I'm worn out form reading all of this...
QUICK POLL
How many here (be honest, yea right!) posting on this topic are actually IN the U.S.?

Does anyone else here start reading a thread, and about half way through it get so pissed off, yet you don't have the energy to respond because people are just reacting to recent news in such an extreme fashion? I know you Shackers are smarter than this...

*too tired to argue this shit*

Finally, after all these years, President Reagan gets want he wants.

Here's a poser. Say some terrorist blows up a suitcase nuke and wipes out Washington D.C. Who are we going to fire out nukes at in retaliation? Iraq? Somalia? Sudan? Afghanistan? The whole lot of them? The whole muslim world? Russia? China?

Anyone want to comment on this kind of senario cause its really giving me a brain itch.

I don't quite understand the people who are saying things like "thanks for another arms race Bush". Being against withdrawing from the ABM treaty I can understand, but at least be against it for a logical reason like "I don't support a missile-defense system at all, I think money should be used elsewhere."

Let's see, this starts another arms race because (a) Russia will start building nukes, (b) China will start building nukes, (c) India/Pakistan will start building nukes, or (d) none of the above. This is not 1980, there is no evil empire. The Russians don't think it's the greatest move on the US' part, but they're not building up their arsenal. China is in talks with both Russia and the US and has known this was coming for months. India/Pakistan are following China's lead, and keeping a wary eye toward both Iraq/Iran/Afghanistan and Israel/Palestine.

All in all, there is some world disappointment in the US, but no world panic, and no renewed arms race.

I also feel like people using this as I time to point at last year's election fiasco are being juvenile. The election is over, it was finalized in a legal way, and whether or not that actually means things were fair, it means the US has a legitimate president whose right to be in office is, at this point, as solid as that of any previous president.

...and this pertains to gaming in what way?

Stick to gaming; CNN does the news.

no alt.binaries.multimedia.* for you!! ;)

Mark my words. George Walker Bush Will Start World War 3.

It's been said before, judging from the number of comments. All this does is piss off other countries, and allows us to develop useless defenses, that just won't work.

I guess it would make it easier to shoot down passenger airlines with a LASER though... of course, nobody would ever see said laser.

well, if you're going to report one bit of news, shouldn't you oughta report the Bin Laden news, link and all? Nah, just stick to the games.

You guys are forgetting one thing. For this system to work well (or at all) you need some high resolution radars to be built around the world at strategic places. One of the most important, if not THE most important, places is in Greenland. As some of you know Greenland is part of the Danish Kingdom but has it's own government. This government said a couple of days ago that they won't allow the radar to be built (they want to get rid of the US presence since during the Cold War the US made a scandal up there ripping apart villages to build a base).
Now, Denmark still decides the foreign policy of Greenland but I doubt the Danish politicians with the current negative public opinion in Denmark will allow the US to make the base even larger.
Basicly you could end up missing one of the key facilities that would be making this system work.

Mr. Bush.... WTF!?!?!???

Nukes, personal freedoms taken away, terrorist attacks, lions, tigers and bears OH MY!!
Perfect World = NO HUMANS TO FUCK IT UP PERIOD!!]b

not the right post but under similar news? :P

Thank Allah America came out of its caves. We hit her the first hit and the next one will hit her with the hands of the believers, the good believers, the strong believers. By Allah it is a great work

where are these believers now? DEAD w00t!

Ummm, is it just me or is this "War on Terrorism" BS just giving the US justification to do whatever they want? I don't think this is a good thing(tm).
Anyway, my conspiracy theory is still that the WTC was a inside job to give the US Gov't a) overwhelming public approval and b) an excuse to flex their muscle a bit.
<./me ducks incoming patriotism-fueled flames>

I wish I got here at the start of these comments, looks like an interesting article.

Nice post, Jack. No scarcasim this time. :)

Bin Laden's video is here:

http://nyheder.tv2.dk/

Personally, I approve of pulling out of the ABM Treaty. It was a relic of the Cold War which has lost it's relevence in the modern world of emerging smaller nuclear powers.

No, missile defense will not stop hijacked airplanes or anthrax letters, it's not designed to. It should be viewed as one part of a layered defense that we need to build to reflect the new nature of the enemies we face.

awesome, more crazy new weaapons to kill every person on this earth 8 times over.

i'm starting to get sick of all this bush thinks this bush does that bullshit. you people actually think bush comes up with this shit himself? he can't even tie his own shoe laces.

If this was swept under the rug, how come I knew about it two days ago? If your brain is so sensationalized with the dumb Bin Laden tape that you can't process other information, that's your own problem.

That stupid stupid fuck, fuck.

Yeah this whoooole thing was thought up by George W Bush. I bet he woke up one morning and while having his cheerios said to himself, you know what... I think that fucking over everyone is on the order of business today, lets get to it!

I know that the ignorant masses have always needed a scapegoat to direct their hatred towards, but if you're going to have a problem with US policy, you should take it up with the fucking government, this country is not in any way shape or form run by a single man. Just because you don't know who's pulling the strings doesn't mean you should burn the puppet.