A Little Sanity In A Sea Of Psychosis (w/Update)

by Daniel Russ on September 19, 2009

SS-26 Stone, theatre ballistic missile built and deployed by Russia

SS-26 Stone, theatre ballistic missile built and deployed by Russia

In a return gesture redolent of the détente between Cold War enemies, Vladimir Popovkin announced that Russian short range missile interceptors will not be placed on Kaliningrad.

“Reason has prevailed over ambitions,” Popovkin said. “Naturally, we will cancel countermeasures which Russia has planned in response, such as the (planned) deployment of Iskander missiles in the Kaliningrad region.”

The Obama Administration made the announcement this week that US missile interceptors and radar networks would not be placed on Czech and Polish soil. This came after intelligence agencies informed the president that Iran is at least five years away from being able to launch a nuclear strike effectively.

In a recent conversation I had with an associate in Austin, my friend stated emphatically that once Iran has the bomb Jerusalem will be nuked. This is nothing but ignorant war mongering at worst or repeating the bullshit talking point of the media’s noise machines at best. Iran would no more nuke Jerusalem than Newt Gingrich would join the ACLU. Iran would be destroyed quite literally economically from such a move and quite literally after an Israeli/US counterattack.

A little sanity in a sea of psychosis.

That said, pressure is on for Iran to halt their nuclear weapons program, and I suppose that is a good thing as long as it really means they are not developing weaponized nukes versus power producing nukes. One thing we all should have learned since the first atomic bomb was detonated, it bestows little real power upon the holder, since all or nothing gambits such as this have little upside.

If you nuke someone in the modern age, the downside is so much worse than the upside.

Update 9/20/09

SECDEF Gates writes in today’s NYT: “Those who say we are scrapping missile defense in Europe are either misinformed or misrepresenting what we are doing. This shift has even been distorted as some sort of concession to Russia, which has fiercely opposed the old plan. Russia’s attitude and possible reaction played no part in my recommendation to the president on this issue. Of course, considering Russia’s past hostility toward American missile defense in Europe, if Russia’s leaders embrace this plan, then that will be an unexpected — and welcome — change of policy on their part. But in any case the facts are clear: American missile defense on the continent will continue, and not just in Central Europe, the most likely location for future SM-3 sites, but, we hope, in other NATO countries as well.

This proposal is, simply put, a better way forward — as was recognized by Prime Minister Donald Tusk of Poland when he called it “a chance for strengthening Europe’s security.” It is a very real manifestation of our continued commitment to our NATO allies in Europe — iron-clad proof that the United States believes that the alliance must remain firm.”

Sources: Wikipedia

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iBfP25PNSK26-XwSw1faZNQT2ZDQD9AQALA00

Share

Related Posts:

{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }

Nadine September 21, 2009 at 6:07 am

Greatings, Thanks for article. Everytime like to read you.
Have a nice day

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: