- Joined
- Oct 12, 2009
- Messages
- 23,909
- Reaction score
- 11,003
- Location
- New Jersey
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
President Obama has signaled he wants to share SM-3 missile defense systems with Russia. The SM-3, as I found out is the Navy's Aegis anti-ballistic missile which is a short to medium ranged defensive missile. Security members think this is a bad idea overall but worse if Russia shares said technology with China, North Korea and possibly Iran. There are also some questions as to the legality of sharing such systems with Russia. (See article below).
Inside the Ring - Washington Times
Some background on SM-3 missile systems.
RIM-161 Standard Missile 3 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Presumably, this is a "gift" to Russia to show the US is serious about missile talks with Russia which are currently stalled.
Good idea or not?
Wasn't Aegis the crown jewel of the Navy at one point? We've already shared it with allies, but Russia? Man I dunno about this.
Edit: And is this just about the Standard Missile, or is it the Aegis Combat System as a whole, including radar tech and everything?
SB - don't know the details about exactly what sub-systems or support systems will go along with the deal as it's being presented. I have a difficult time with just the missile itself... if, hypothetically, it did include the radar tech, tracking systems, etc... there's no way under any circumstances I would be for sending it to Russia.
I cant think of any situation where sharing military technology with another country, not to mention a country that not even half a century ago, was within a hairs breath of launching nuclear missles against us, is a good idea. I wouldnt even share that kind of tech with Canada, who has never lefted a finger against us.
Sure, yes. If sharing some anti-missile defense tech makes Russia more willing to give up more of it's nukes, that definitely makes us safer overall.
Yeah, that worked really well the last time. We got a treaty where we gave up a bunch of nukes and they gave up nothing.
Sure, yes. If sharing some anti-missile defense tech makes Russia more willing to give up more of it's nukes, that definitely makes us safer overall.
Well, to be frank we have shared a lot of technology with our allies, including nations like Korea, Japan, and the Brits.
SOME of its nukes??? At the height of the cold war russia had thousands of nuclear warheads. Even as late at 2007 they had over 3000! They could give up all but 100 of them and still be able to destroy every human on the planet! The idea that we would sacrifice cutting edge missile tech in exchange for the possibility that they might think about getting rid of a few nukes shows me just how kiss a$$ this presidency is.
Well, to be frank we have shared a lot of technology with our allies, including nations like Korea, Japan, and the Brits.
Huh? They have reduced their nuclear arsenal from 55,000 to 2,000....
They have cut their arsenal from about 55,000 to about 2,000 due to various treaties with the US over the years. That's huge. Every nuke that is out there means more chance it will slip into the hands of terrorists or who knows what. Aegis is just a missile DEFENSE system, it's not an offensive weapon. What is your concern exactly? You worry that we will one day launch ICBMs at them and they'll have an easier time blocking it? Why would we do that?
And one of these days those countries might be our enemies and or someone in those countries might leak that tech to other countries.
It doesnt matter if or why! Its a defense system! What drives further inovation in weapons technology?? Its the ongoing ability for someone to develop a weapon that can get past existing defense systems!
If we give someone our defense tech, first of all that gives them a way to design around it, and second it levels the playing field. It cancels itself out. In the name of national security, neither country will willingly allow themselves to be at the mercy of another country. Because of this, their first priority is going to be to develop a weapon that our current defense systems cannot stop. By giving them that tech they know its capabilities and exactly what it will take to get around it.
And as far as it being a strictly defensive weapon, its still a missile! cant you imagine someone simply putting an existing nuclear warhead on that DEFENSIVE weapon?
Look what happened to the vast majority of Russia's military when their government collapsed! It all went to the highest bidder! Thats what could happen again!
Right! That's why we need to get as many of those nukes out of there as we can asap.
So lay out what you're worried about? You think we're going to have a nuclear war with Russia? That's just silly.
So lay out what you're worried about? You think we're going to have a nuclear war with Russia? That's just silly.
No. It's about giving away things we don't need to give away with no reason to think we'll get anything meaningful in return.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?