[Rev_Blair]

Layton was pounding Martin on this in Question Period today. Martin says he is against the weaponisation of space and nuclear proliferation, but he won't act like a man and come out against BMD. Martin is an idiot.

[Gonzo]

And now Russia is getting in on the act, building a "nuclear weapons system that could defeat the American patriot missiles." Does this seem like bull-shit? America needs an arms race so Russia's going to help them out. The truth is, anything can beat Americas patriot missiles because they dont work. America wants to use fear tactics to push ahead it's agenda, and stupid people will fall for it and give Bush the support he wants. You'd think that whith all the poverty in Russia they'd spend there money more wisely.

[Scape]

Look at my new toyz!

A mobile hyper-sonic launch system. More with video

[Rev_Blair]

I've seen two analysts say that Russia's announcement today signals the end of the love affair between Putin and Bush, Gonzo. It's not that the Russians think they need to be able to defeat the US system, it's that they have an excuse and, since Bush backed out the international treaty governing nukes and started this BMD crap, they have an excuse.

Russia has a problem. They need to hang on to their rocket scientists, it's always been the driving force behind their science programs. Rocket scientists need to build rockets. It's what they do. George Bush has created an excuse for Russia to do that.

[inverted]

Couple of points:

BMD is not the same as the patriot missle. Even with the patriot a lot has been improved since the first Gulf War, now if something were to go wrong it would be the operators fault not the weapon. Probably no consolation to the pilot of a plane shot down, but the guy on the ground now has to pull the trigger. Plus the radar used to track and identify incoming targets has gone through technological leaps and bounds.

Russia has been trying to develop a missle defense since early in the eighties, this isn't new news. So have the Brits and Chinese. The Americans were just being the most vocal about it. Most of these countries have taken the approach that it's better to be ready for the threat when it arrives than try and react to it afterwards.

I do support BMD provided a two key points are addressed. Canada will not help pay for the building and implementation of the system. I have no problem building and placing radar stations along the west coast (we already have a bunch up north) since these can also be used for ATC and marine surveillance. Also there has to be a rock solid clause that the US will not use this as a stepping stone to the weaponization of space. These are ground based missles designed to knock out a small number of warheads.

Being involved gives us a tad bit more say than not being involved, also it means that our guys sitting in the NORAD command posts will still be able to do there jobs, which keeps us in the loop.

[Scape]

Being involved will legitimize the concept of a program that empowers further militarization without any means of oversight. You don't take blind leaps without faith. We should always plan for the worst and hope for the best but there are consequences to this that is far more reaching than you may not have been told. Simply sitting at the table will commit us to a process we will be unable to back away from. Reasons to walk away from the table.

[Rev_Blair]

I don't think Canada deserves this deal either, Godz. The Canadian people have done absolutely nothing to deserve having missile system pushed on them that will cost massive amounts of money, involve us in a new arms race, lead to the militarisation of space, make the world a less safe place, and doesn't even work.

Canadians are nice people, what did we do to deserve this crap?

[Rev_Blair]

[Scape]

Defence can be dual use. You can use the shield to blind the enemy satellite reconnaissance and take advantage of the weakness to destroy them. Thus it is a 1st strike weapon and that is more important that being seen as offensive or defensive. Being seen as a 1st strike will compel a counter-response and thus a new nuclear arms race. That is an unacceptable escalation of force and clearly avoidable. The principals of M.A.D. are still in place, 1st strike dogma works to undermine this by using the rogue terrorist threat. The fact is it simply is not defensible on such a scale that can be made to work and not bust the budget. This is a ploy to line the pockets of the people who have the money in the 1st place. You might as well pull a G. Gordon Liddy: listening to Hitler "made me feel a strength inside I had never known before"

[Richard]

Why do we as a country keep falling for this bullshit. The Arrow for a Bowmarc. 26 Radar stations that were obsolete and cost us millions to operate and for a consolation prize gave reason for targeting us for a military strike. Now we are going to allow the US to help thier economy again building a weapons system to deploy on our soil. Land,sea or air? Has anyone looked at Canada the only real place we are vunerable"go figure" is from the south. Really if you Nuke your f#@#ing opponent what have you won? Dettant kiss my ass its common sense if there is such a thing left on this rock.

[Rev_Blair]

We as a country don't. We as a country ruled by fools and charlatans do.

[Gladman]

I don't think we are falling for anything. We need to be in on this for the simple fact that we need a voice in it, if nothing else. Will it work, I don't know, I'm not an expert (read, not Gonzo), but if we don't have a say in our own defence, decisions will be made that directly affect us without our voice.

As for the weaponization of space, sheesh, give me a break. They (US, Russia, China) send stuff up all the time and say that its a spy sat or say nothing at all. If anybody really believes there's not already weapons in space, I think its time for a head shake. Obviously I can't back that up, but the SR-71 was flying at Mach Insane for 12 years before we ever new about it, so it makes sense to me that there's a few other things that they aren't telling us as well. We might as well get in on it, because if we don't, we then truely loose our voice.

[Scape]

Gladman Gladman:

I don't think we are falling for anything. We need to be in on this for the simple fact that we need a voice in it, if nothing else. Will it work, I don't know, I'm not an expert (read, not Gonzo), but if we don't have a say in our own defence, decisions will be made that directly affect us without our voice.

As for the weaponization of space, sheesh, give me a break. They (US, Russia, China) send stuff up all the time and say that its a spy sat or say nothing at all. If anybody really believes there's not already weapons in space, I think its time for a head shake. Obviously I can't back that up, but the SR-71 was flying at Mach Insane for 12 years before we ever new about it, so it makes sense to me that there's a few other things that they aren't telling us as well. We might as well get in on it, because if we don't, we then truely loose our voice.

Sitting down to the table will legitimize an illegitimate plan.

This is a Trojan horse argument, once in we will not be able to get out. We are already a apart of a form of missile defense with NORAD. You should ask why they are doing an end round NORAD 1st before even thinking about considering the MDS plan.