Bush, SDI, and the future of the planet

L

Logic

Guest
Back during the cold war, America (under President Reagan) announced a program for strategic missile defence that would allow enemy missiles, air craft, and other airborne threats, to be targeted and eliminated from space, through the use of a large satellite system that would orbit the earth. This project, often called "Star Wars", was known as SDI, or the 'Strategic Defense Initiative". At the time, critics called the project unrealistic, but since Russia and the US were so competitive at the time (this was the cold war after all), Russia announced their own similar project. Ridiculous sums of money were poured into both projects, and in a sense, SDI became an economic weapon, contributing to the Soviet Union's downfall by causing them to spend enormous amounts of money to compete with the US. Once the cold war ended, though, I don't think anyone really believed that either project would ever come to fruition. Big space lasers? Nah, not gonna happen. The project was cancelled in the early 90s, though military research of course never ended. Since then, different presidential administrations have proposed varying different missile defense systems, such as "GPALS", but these were merely proposed, not developed.

Now, though, it looks as if it will not only happen, but that it's just around the corner. George W. Bush is determined to bring the project into fruition, and the system is intended to be deployed, at a cost of up to US$60 billion, by 2005. The project will breach the 1972 ABM treaty with Russia, but Bush has stated that if the Russians won't change their terms, he will go ahead with it anyway. Previous presidents (such as Bush Sr.) have suggested that the project could be a joint venture by the US and Russia, but the current project is being developed solely by the United States. The US has has oposition from many nations regarding the development of SDI, but the project continues.

There is absolutely no intention for the project to be turned over to the United Nations, which I believe it should be, indicating that this project is, just as it was in the cold war, being developed to give the US a nearly unmatchable military component, and consequently, effective control of the planet through military power. Of course, we all know that not even United Nations resistance will stop Bush, who effectively destroyed the UN's power by ignoring them and going to war with Iraq against their decisions. This is not a case of the US trying to keep peace throughout the world, but rather a case of the US trying to gain and maintain control of the world.

During the cold war, neither Russia nor the US fired on each other, because they knew that if one country deployed a nuclear strike, the other would deploy a retaliation strike moments later, and both countries would be devastated. With this system in place, particularly as the technology improves in accuracy and effectiveness, the US will be able to stop foreign nuclear weapons from reaching their country, meaning they will be able to attack without retalliation. Considering Bush's recent actions, and indeed America's past use of large-scale weapons, it seems now that the world may yet again see the use of nuclear \ atomic weapons.

This is happening NOW. This isn't some far off fantasy, or science fiction, or even an unrealistic military objective.. In no time at all, Bush will have a space-deployed weapon system, capable of being pointed at anything, anywhere, on or around planet earth. Bush has demonstrated that he has no hesitation using military power to achieve goals. Though the system is technically 'defensive', the offensive potential of such a weapon system is obvious, and once deployed, it would simply become another part of the US military's arsenal, and another step, if not the defining step, towards a world governed not through peace by the United Nations, but through the threat of destruction, by George W. Bush.

Whether or not you support Bush, and whether or not you are American, this is cause for concern. If anyone has a point of view on this, please share it, and lets have some open minded discussion on the topic.
 
If the system gets launched, I hope that terrorists will do something about it. Seriously. I'd rather see the US get nuked.
 
Spartan said:
If the system gets launched, I hope that terrorists will do something about it. Seriously. I'd rather see the US get nuked.
The American people shouldn't be made to suffer, it is after all just one man causing all the problems.
 
It is disgusting but the irony is that America won't be nuked by an ICBM, if there ever is a nuclear device detonated it would have been smuggled in secretly....one would think so anyway. No-one will know who did it, America won't know who to retailate against and MAD is not initiated.
 
Logic said:
The American people shouldn't be made to suffer, it is after all just one man causing all the problems.

One man where many of them voted for..
 
So more inocent people will be killed.

Yeah im pretty sure thats the solution... :|
 
Logic said:
The American people shouldn't be made to suffer, it is after all just one man causing all the problems.

Currently, it looks like the American people re-elected Bush. So there. At any rate, America is becoming too much of threat to world safety. Hopefully it will collapse on its own.
 
I agree Spart. You'd think that after Bush has proven how incompetent he is in office after four years, there would be many more people supporting whoever is running against him. It looks like the psycological campaigns have worked and even more people are voting for him and unbelievable amounts of people are easily 'brainwashed' I guess.
 
Yeah, that 60 billion dollar SDI system will be a fine defense for small teams of determined terrorists infiltrating underguarded nuclear facilities.
 
If the system gets launched, I hope that terrorists will do something about it. Seriously. I'd rather see the US get nuked.

If your going to cause us problems in the U.S., hurry up, get on our soil, and start shooting at us. Were reproducing like Rabbits here!

The American people shouldn't be made to suffer, it is after all just one man causing all the problems.

They dont care. They honestly dont.

Thats okay, you Aussie's were always good to us. :D

No-one will know who did it, America won't know who to retailate against and MAD is not initiated.

So...could you hurry up and do this too? I mean, discussing it does get boring. Doing it. Wow, that would be awesome.

After all, you dont care about the retributions. :D Oh, and you will reap them.

One man where many of them voted for..

All people like you, but thats okay. Nuking America would cause you Environmental problems, and us nuking back, would put our whole genetic ancestry into a spin.

The only thing left on this earth, would be Cochroaches and Archibacteria.

Currently, it looks like the American people re-elected Bush. So there. At any rate, America is becoming too much of threat to world safety. Hopefully it will collapse on its own.

Well, we have'nt invaded Europe.

Your depressed. Goto sleep.

It looks like the psycological campaigns have worked and even more people are voting for him and unbelievable amounts of people are easily 'brainwashed' I guess.

HEY YOU! FLORIDA! BUSH'S ELECTORAL STATE! SHUT THE **** UP!

...thank you.
 
Speaking of invasion, someone once told me that US forces could occupy the entire planet, easily. I wonder if Iraq has changed his mind. US forces wouldn't last a day in Europe.
 
Spartan said:
I wonder if Iraq has changed his mind

Who is this "iraq" you speak of?

edit: ohh i get it, sorry i read it wrong
 
Speaking of invasion, someone once told me that US forces could occupy the entire planet, easily. I wonder if Iraq has changed his mind. US forces wouldn't last a day in Europe.

When Conventional Armies fight Coventional War, the one with the best Coventional Weapons, wins.

We have all of the above criteria. France would surrender, Holland would retreat into Germany, then Russia, would invade Poland.

World War II all over again--except, backwards.
 
If Europe-Russia-China allied vs America we'd have a 1 billion men army, plus advanced weaponry, plus possible Arab support, which would take you down in no time.
 
Yes, I stopped. Because I made coffee and chuckling while brewing coffee would've been bad ;)

About an invasion: I don't know, I don't think it has been tried like that, or has it?
 
Spartan said:
Speaking of invasion, someone once told me that US forces could occupy the entire planet, easily. I wonder if Iraq has changed his mind. US forces wouldn't last a day in Europe.


W.t.f. are you on about?

Your just as bad as the kiddy that told you the US could occupy the world.

Sprafa said:
If Europe-Russia-China allied vs America we'd have a 1 billion men army, plus advanced weaponry, plus possible Arab support, which would take you down in no time.


First off.....you guys couldnt unite against a cockroach. That and your ill equipped and trained billion men would be pretty useless without any proper supply train or mode of transportation. Your economies would colapse.

Second, Big GB would not hesitate to ...


"Oh shit there goes the planet"
 
K e r b e r o s said:
When Conventional Armies fight Coventional War, the one with the best Coventional Weapons, wins.

We have all of the above criteria. Holland would retreat into Germany, then Russia, would invade Poland.

World War II all over again--except, backwards.

I can see that you didn't pay any attention to what I said. If US forces can't keep it together in Iraq, they have no chance againts a modern, well-equipped, well-trained and motivated army.

France would surrender

And why is this?
 
Those who voted for Bush aren't accountable for his actions or decisions. I'd never suggest that the US should be nuked. The whole issue here is that the current political path of the United States is a threat to world peace, and to nuke the US to stop them is exactly as bad as bush bombing or invading "for peace". Violence isn't the answer.

What we have here is a case of Bush pushing for United States control of the world. If he was truly an advocate of world peace, he would accept the leadership of the UN and not take world matters into his own hands. He wants America to rule the world, and he's developing the means to make that a reality.
 
If Europe-Russia-China allied vs America we'd have a 1 billion men army, plus advanced weaponry, plus possible Arab support, which would take you down in no time.

China does'nt like you. Russia, they dont like you either. In America, you pushed us to not liking you.

The Bear, the Dragon, and the Eagle.

Dont **** with us.
 
crabcakes66 said:
W.t.f. are you on about?

Your just as bad as the kiddy that told you the US could occupy the world.

I'm just being logical and realistic.
 
I can see that you didn't pay any attention to what I said. If US forces can't keep it together in Iraq, they have no chance againts a modern, well-equipped, well-trained and motivated army.

Yes they would. It would just mean we'd have to re-arous our Wartime Democracy, and pave down Europe with level bombers again.

You forget one thing about our Conventional Warfare. We chased Germany out of France, because of our Air Power, and our Navy.

Taking France, and Germany, would be a task, but it would'nt be too awefully hard. Besides, we could use ports in Britain again.

I'm just being logical and realistic.

No your not. If you were being logical and realistic, you would'nt have bothered listening to your own "OMFG BUSH WON" hysteria. Oh, and I would'nt be posting this.
 
Well, most of the european states are friends with Russia now. But China wouldn't help I think.
 
Well, most of the european states are friends with Russia now. But China wouldn't help I think.

Russia is our buddy. They're fighting terrorism too. They like us. They dont like you. China, would help Russia, because of their political states.

China, has also developed to fight terrorism. They'd be on our side aswell.
 
K e r b e r o s said:
You forget one thing about our Conventional Warfare. We chased Germany out of France, because of our Air Power, and our Navy.

That was about sixty years ago... it's 2004, now.

Taking France, and Germany, would be a task, but it would'nt be too awefully hard. Besides, we could use ports in britain again.

Just like taking Iraq hasn't proved awfully hard... or Vietnam.
 
K e r b e r o s said:
Yes they would. It would just mean we'd have to re-arous our Wartime Democracy, and pave down Europe with level bombers again.

You forget one thing about our Conventional Warfare. We chased Germany out of France, because of our Air Power, and our Navy.

Taking France, and Germany, would be a task, but it would'nt be too awefully hard. Besides, we could use ports in Britain again.



No your not. If you were being logical and realistic, you would'nt have bothered listening to your own "OMFG BUSH WON" hysteria. Oh, and I would'nt be posting this.


Your Air force only has air supremacy under the unexistant opposition of an similarly advanced air force.

The moment the USA attacked any country in the EU, the entire EU would gang up and blast away. Odds are an Iberian Invasion wouldn't go up from the Pyrinees.

Russia and China have better relations with the EU now than they ever had with the USA. You can't hold that up kiddo.
 
K e r b e r o s said:
Russia is our buddy. They're fighting terrorism too. They like us. They dont like you. China, would help Russia, because of their political states.

China, has also developed to fight terrorism. They'd be on our side aswell.

Wait. Russia and China would ally with the US againts the rest of the world because Bush says "there are terrorists everywhere lets attack random countries at once?" Are you high on something?
 
Your Air force only has air supremacy under the unexistant opposition of an similarly advanced air force.

Similarly? No. Not at all. Course, most of your technologies, you should be thanking Britain and America for.

Plus, you cant handle the F-22 aces. Your just pwned right there.
 
K e r b e r o s said:
Things have'nt changed at all.

Ookkkaayyy.. I'm apparently dealing with some crazed lunatic who is still reliving World War II.

We'll resume this discussion when your flashback is over.
 
I somehow doubt we'll see an invasion of the US. Besides, once SDI is operational, they will be able to simply threaten to nuke the countries posing a threat, because they will be able to bring down any retalliation strike. SDI doesn't garantee the world safety from nuclear attacks... it just makes America's nuclear arsenal usable and effective as a threat.
 
Wait. Russia and China would ally with the US againts the rest of the world because Bush says "there are terrorists everywhere lets attack random countries at once?" Are you high on something?

No, but are you?

Remember, you started believing your own "OMFG BUSH WON" hysteria, and you starting posting "OMFG BURN TEH US OMFG". Now, im retalliating.

Its your fault, remember that, and stupidity is infinite, so we could go all day.
 
K e r b e r o s said:
Similarly? No. Not at all. Course, most of your technologies, you should be thanking Britain and America for.

Plus, you cant handle the F-22 aces. Your just pwned right there.

The Russians have a similar air force, and combined with the European Air force they'd have extreme numerical superiority. Your Air Force still uses mostly F-15s. F-22s would certainly be a big card, but they wouldn't stand a chance agaisnt air defense coordinated with the new radar "cellphone" technology.
 
Ookkkaayyy.. I'm apparently dealing with some crazed lunatic who is still reliving World War II.

We'll resume this discussion when your flashback is over.

Im so glad you've not learned from history. This will make you easier to defeat in Conventional Warfare. (Please remember, you started this.)

I somehow doubt we'll see an invasion of the US. Besides, once SDI is operational, they will be able to simply threaten to nuke the countries posing a threat, because they will be able to bring down any retalliation strike. SDI doesn't garantee the world safety from nuclear attacks... it just makes America's nuclear arsenal usable and effective as a threat.

This just makes us even better...or worse? Help me Europe, I cant decide.
 
K e r b e r o s said:
No, but are you?

Remember, you started believing your own "OMFG BUSH WON" hysteria

I said that it currently seems that Bush has won. Big difference.

and you starting posting "OMFG BURN TEH US OMFG". Now, im retalliating.

Assuming SDI goes active...

Shit, he can't even read. Anyway, my time is up so I have to go.
 
Sprafa said:
Russia and China have better relations with the EU now than they ever had with the USA. You can't hold that up kiddo.

seconded.
 
The Russians have a similar air force, and combined with the European Air force they'd have extreme numerical superiority. Your Air Force still uses mostly F-15s.

Actually, reforms in 2001, returned our use to faster aircraft, like the F/A-18 Hornet. Your airforces, mostly relie on old US Equipment sold off to you during the 1980's.

This is not to say, since America developed the first Atomic Weapon, we would'nt be able to develope another weapon, with similiar or more devastating effects. :D
 
Back
Top