ABM Treaty

MILAMBER · 12-13-2001, 04:16 PM

What do you all think about the U.S backing out of the ABM treaty? Do you think it matters to world security? Is it wrong for the U.S to have technology that can protect it's citizens from a ballistic missile and not implement the technology because of a 30 year old treaty? Is it wrong for us to have that technology period?

Sir ReGiN · 12-13-2001, 04:21 PM

Well, the effects might be another cold war, where countries "compete" in building better and better missile protections, for better and better missiles..
And besides, that treaty does exist for a reason

Sir Kenyth · 12-13-2001, 04:36 PM

I don't think any country can be faulted for building completely defensive measures. Might as well say building a wall and stationing troops at the border is wrong too.

Sir Taliesin · 12-13-2001, 05:30 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Sir ReGiN:
Well, the effects might be another cold war, where countries "compete" in building better and better missile protections, for better and better missiles..
And besides, that treaty does exist for a reason

Personally I don't see another arms race happening. Russia doesn't have the capital to spend on building new missiles. They don't even have the capital to pay their soldiers, for christ sake. China might,
but I bet the generals in charge of China would rather spend the money on factories and such. The only peple that will build new weapons of mass destruction are "wanna bes" like Iraq, Iran and North Korea. None of which will ever be a super power.

Djinn Raffo · 12-13-2001, 05:43 PM

Ballistic missles are bad for world.
Military spending is good for economy.
$$$
$$$
$$$

BlackRaven · 12-13-2001, 06:06 PM

I thought the treaty was absurd when I first heard of it 30 years ago and I think it's absurd today. What kind of twisted liberal thinking comes up with the idea we would be safer without any defense?

Morgan_Corbesant · 12-13-2001, 06:15 PM

i agree blackraven (woohoo, a fellow oregonian) unfortunately, blackraven and i live in the most liberal state in America!! but to say that building ANTI-Ballistic missle DEFENSES is wrong,that is obserd!!!(spelling)
thats like saying, "no, our military doesnt need weapons, let them hug the enemy, and shake his hand." i agree that war sux. however, there will NEVER, EVER, be peace throughout the world, the middle east will make sure of that. so to say NOT to build weapons, or defenses for said weapons.........that is dumb!!!!

[img]graemlins/ninja.gif[/img]

MILAMBER · 12-13-2001, 06:24 PM

Well, it seems that most of us Americans are for it. I personally have nothing wrong with my government initiating measures to help ensure my safety. What do you Europeans think? Would your answer be the same if your country had a device to safeguard against ballistic missiles?

Medicina the druid · 12-13-2001, 06:59 PM

hmm BG and world politics, i dont see the connection..........?
but since someone mistakenly started this thread here instead of an international news forum, i may as well add on.

absurd things about missle defence:
an icbm is an unlikely threat

more likely is chemical /biological/or "dirty" radiation leaking bomb... none of which need a missle to deliver, only suitcases and devoted individuals who hate america...

i dont think a missle defense shield can stop suit case smuggling unless someone goes to all the effort of duct taping a suitcase to an icbm...very unlikely

so why spend billions possibly a trillion bucks on something that will not protect us from the REAL dangers?

our only hope is to eliminate the real threat:

isolation

it means recognizing that our life and wellbeing is connected to the wellbeing of other peoples
it means reforming our economies to benefit all the peoples of the world so that no part
of humankind suffers from isolation or oppression.
It means recognizing that we are one Human family and must not neglect
any members.
It means examining our concepts, beliefs, insitutions, and behaviours to see if they have a uniting or isolating effect.....

Lord of Alcohol · 12-13-2001, 07:30 PM

I think the missile defense will ultimatly prove a complete waste of time. Money no, because what we develop can be used in other ways. But if someone wants to use a nuke whats to stop them from putting it on a freighter and sail it legally into any US harbor? Nothing thats what. No ABM treaty will stop that, and its not worth pissing off the rest of the world over it. Any nation who actually launched a nuclear missile at us or anyone else would be a)vilified by every counrty in the world, b) become a target of every country in the world. So in effect its useless

12-13-2001, 04:16 PM	#1
MILAMBER Lord Soth Join Date: March 5, 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 1,948	What do you all think about the U.S backing out of the ABM treaty? Do you think it matters to world security? Is it wrong for the U.S to have technology that can protect it's citizens from a ballistic missile and not implement the technology because of a 30 year old treaty? Is it wrong for us to have that technology period? __________________ \"The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his.\"<br />-General George Patton (1885-1945)<br /> <br />Member of CLAN HADB<br />Founder of The Anti Clan Coalition

12-13-2001, 04:36 PM	#3
Sir Kenyth Fzoul Chembryl Join Date: August 30, 2001 Location: somewhere Age: 54 Posts: 1,785	I don't think any country can be faulted for building completely defensive measures. Might as well say building a wall and stationing troops at the border is wrong too. __________________ Master Barbsman and wielder of the razor wit!<br /><br />There are dark angels among us. They present themselves in shining raiment but there is, in their hearts, the blackness of the abyss.

12-13-2001, 05:30 PM	#4
Sir Taliesin Silver Dragon Join Date: March 4, 2001 Location: Knoxville, TN USA Age: 60 Posts: 1,641	quote: Originally posted by Sir ReGiN: Well, the effects might be another cold war, where countries "compete" in building better and better missile protections, for better and better missiles.. And besides, that treaty does exist for a reason Personally I don't see another arms race happening. Russia doesn't have the capital to spend on building new missiles. They don't even have the capital to pay their soldiers, for christ sake. China might, but I bet the generals in charge of China would rather spend the money on factories and such. The only peple that will build new weapons of mass destruction are "wanna bes" like Iraq, Iran and North Korea. None of which will ever be a super power. __________________ Sir Taliesin<br /><br />Hello... Good bye.

12-13-2001, 06:06 PM	#6
BlackRaven Dungeon Master Join Date: November 17, 2001 Location: Oregon Posts: 55	I thought the treaty was absurd when I first heard of it 30 years ago and I think it's absurd today. What kind of twisted liberal thinking comes up with the idea we would be safer without any defense? __________________ I was born on the prairies where the wind blew free and there was nothing to break the light of the sun. I was born where there were no enclosures. --- Geronimo

12-13-2001, 06:15 PM	#7
Morgan_Corbesant Symbol of Cyric Join Date: August 19, 2001 Location: Portland, Oregon Age: 46 Posts: 1,224	i agree blackraven (woohoo, a fellow oregonian) unfortunately, blackraven and i live in the most liberal state in America!! but to say that building ANTI-Ballistic missle DEFENSES is wrong,that is obserd!!!(spelling) thats like saying, "no, our military doesnt need weapons, let them hug the enemy, and shake his hand." i agree that war sux. however, there will NEVER, EVER, be peace throughout the world, the middle east will make sure of that. so to say NOT to build weapons, or defenses for said weapons.........that is dumb!!!! [img]graemlins/ninja.gif[/img] __________________ Morgan Corbesant, Elven BladeSinger, Captain of the army of the Seldarine<br /><br /> [img]\"http://www.rleeermey.com/images/linkbanners/usmcredwhiteblue.gif\" alt=\" - \" /><br />Protector of Elves<br />Slayer of Orcs<br /><br />ALL YOUR BASE, ARE BELONG TO US!!!<br />I DON\'T FIGHT FOR HONOR, I FIGHT TO WIN!<br />\"One who is a samurai must before all things keep constantly in mind, by day and by night...the fact that he has to die\". <br />-Daidoji Yuzan-<br />16th Century

12-13-2001, 04:21 PM	#2
Sir ReGiN Gold Dragon Join Date: August 11, 2001 Location: The land of blonde virgins Age: 42 Posts: 2,563	Well, the effects might be another cold war, where countries "compete" in building better and better missile protections, for better and better missiles.. And besides, that treaty does exist for a reason

12-13-2001, 05:43 PM	#5
Djinn Raffo Ra Join Date: March 11, 2001 Location: Ant Hill Age: 49 Posts: 2,397	Ballistic missles are bad for world. Military spending is good for economy. $$$ $$$ $$$

12-13-2001, 06:24 PM	#8
MILAMBER Lord Soth Join Date: March 5, 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 1,948	Well, it seems that most of us Americans are for it. I personally have nothing wrong with my government initiating measures to help ensure my safety. What do you Europeans think? Would your answer be the same if your country had a device to safeguard against ballistic missiles? __________________ \"The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his.\"<br />-General George Patton (1885-1945)<br /> <br />Member of CLAN HADB<br />Founder of The Anti Clan Coalition

12-13-2001, 06:59 PM	#9
Medicina the druid Elite Waterdeep Guard Join Date: December 12, 2001 Location: chicago Age: 51 Posts: 11	hmm BG and world politics, i dont see the connection..........? but since someone mistakenly started this thread here instead of an international news forum, i may as well add on. absurd things about missle defence: an icbm is an unlikely threat more likely is chemical /biological/or "dirty" radiation leaking bomb... none of which need a missle to deliver, only suitcases and devoted individuals who hate america... i dont think a missle defense shield can stop suit case smuggling unless someone goes to all the effort of duct taping a suitcase to an icbm...very unlikely so why spend billions possibly a trillion bucks on something that will not protect us from the REAL dangers? our only hope is to eliminate the real threat: isolation it means recognizing that our life and wellbeing is connected to the wellbeing of other peoples it means reforming our economies to benefit all the peoples of the world so that no part of humankind suffers from isolation or oppression. It means recognizing that we are one Human family and must not neglect any members. It means examining our concepts, beliefs, insitutions, and behaviours to see if they have a uniting or isolating effect..... __________________ The Rivers and Winds do not pretend to know right from wrong<br />and are thus free from mortal struggles

12-13-2001, 07:30 PM	#10
Lord of Alcohol Xanathar Thieves Guild Join Date: January 8, 2001 Location: Charlotte,NC Age: 60 Posts: 4,570	I think the missile defense will ultimatly prove a complete waste of time. Money no, because what we develop can be used in other ways. But if someone wants to use a nuke whats to stop them from putting it on a freighter and sail it legally into any US harbor? Nothing thats what. No ABM treaty will stop that, and its not worth pissing off the rest of the world over it. Any nation who actually launched a nuclear missile at us or anyone else would be a)vilified by every counrty in the world, b) become a target of every country in the world. So in effect its useless __________________ No

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Worldwide anti-smoking treaty comes into force	Dreamer128	General Discussion	4	02-28-2005 06:02 AM
EU Carbon trading starts as the Kyoto treaty comes into force	shamrock_uk	General Discussion	2	02-18-2005 03:19 PM
UK government publishes case for EU treaty	Dreamer128	General Discussion	0	09-16-2004 09:13 AM