The 'Star Wars' Plan

Heres an article I saw at the BBC:

United States President George W Bush has spoken to Russia's president just before a planned speech in which the US leader is expected to outline his vision of a missile defence programme.
Mr Bush is reported to have told President Vladimir Putin that the US would not make "unilateral decisions" about nuclear security.

But in his speech at the Pentagon's National Defense University, Mr Bush is likely to argue that the US cannot be bound by the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty that bans anti-missile systems like the proposed missile shield.
...
The so-called "Son of Star Wars" programme was a key Bush campaign pledge.

Mr Bush believes that "the greatest nuclear threat or missile threat comes from rogue nations, accidental launches, [or] launches of small or single missiles", his spokesman Ari Fleischer said.

In addition to Russia's objections, China fiercely opposes the programme, and even many US allies have reservations about it.

So what are your opinions on this?

Even if you hated the Phantom Menace, you have to admit that George Lucas's "Son of Star Wars" is better that George W Bush's

😂 🤣 😂 🤣 😂

It's fair enough, really. Most of the objections are, ultimately, jealousy. Justified jealousy maybe, but jealousy nevertheless.

Raz did you just call me a Freak???? 🙁

Oh, that one means freak, does it? Well, they all die the same...

No, that was meant to be a confused face. I thought it looked funny anyway.

Ush, you might want to read the second paragraph again.

I say: the more SW the better. 😂

The ABMT is dead in the water and does not actually bar the Star Wars project.

Why is it dead in the water? It was signed by the US and Russia.

It was signed on false pretences, has been vipklated by both sides ever since, and makes no mention of orbital platforms or laser shields. It was NEVER intended as permanent legislation.

The use of ther term Star Wars was less forgivable, and GL should have won that case.

This isn't the only obstacle the US have to overcome. They still need to gain support from the International Community, as they need to install monitor stations in other countries, so that they can detect the missiles.

Well, they HAVE our support. And you will be surprirsed what more support they can get.

Actually the UK hasn't decided to allow the monitor stations.

Althougth the Torys say they are all for it (if they get in), the PM hasn't hasn't given permission yet.

I really hope they don't, as the UK would then be a viable target for a possible missile attack from 'rogue states'.

We already are such a target.

TB has agreed to co-operate, we agreed it in exchange for them supporting the EDF. Itt's a done deal.

What does the EdF have anything to do with the US? Its a EU thing.

By having the sensors, it would put us at a greater risk of attack.
I hope the PM has *really* thought this through...

An overly powerful EDF will weaken Amercian concerns in thatr area- AND NATO, a vital part of our defencwe policy.

No-one can afford to be that insular any more. And we have very little ground for refusing to allow the sensors.

I don't think allowing them to install the sensors will affect their effort in the Balkans.

Don't you care that the UK will be totally unprotected from missiles that try to blow up the sensors???

First of all, we have treay obligations with the Americans. We MUST help them. They help us enough.

Secondly- you have been mis-informed. The planned shield WILL protect us. That was part of the deal. All US allies will be covered.

First, that is no excuse. The obligations can paid in other ways.

Second, the UK will NOT be protected, according to the BBC anyway (look at bold text)

How is the UK involved?

The UK has not yet had any formal request for assistance. But the US is reported to have suggested that the existing US base at Flyingdales and the communications installation at Menwith Hill should be upgraded.

If the UK were to agree, it would benefit from more effective radar warning systems, although there are no interceptors in Europe.

Any UK involvement would be likely to trigger a wave of anti-nuclear protests.