Jump to content

"Star Wars" missiles on British Soil - beeb


Rob W
 Share

Recommended Posts

 

 

The UK and US have held high level talks on the possibility of putting a "Son of Star Wars" anti-ballistic missile defence system on British soil.

 

An article in The Economist claims Prime Minister Tony Blair has lobbied President George Bush for the system.  But government sources have told the BBC that talks are "to keep Britain's options open", not a lobbying effort.  Russia has said the system, which tracks and destroys missiles launched at the US, will trigger an arms race.  Poland and the Czech Republic have both been approached by America about locating part of the hugely expensive system on their soil.

 

Secret talks

 

BBC Defence Correspondent Paul Wood said he had confirmed "secret high-level negotiations" had been taking place.  Talks were continuing between the National Security Council and Britain's top foreign affairs adviser Sir Nigel Sheinwald, he said.  But Downing Street has said talks are at a very early stage, and were intended only to keep Britain in consideration as plans were developed.

 

David Rennie, from the Economist, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme his understanding was that Mr Blair had "personally led" efforts for silos to be based in the UK, believing it would make Britain safer.  The system uses radar and satellites to detect enemy missile launches and to guide interceptors to their targets.    Shadow defence secretary Liam Fox said the Conservatives would not oppose locating part of the system in the UK, but wanted to examine it in detail.

 

'Get honest'

 

"We have had no details at all from the government despite asking a lot of questions in Parliament.  If the government really do want to maintain what they regard as a bipartisan approach to defence in this country, they better start getting honest with the opposition," said Mr Fox.

 

Poland has recently confirmed the US wants to use its territory to build part of its missile defence base.  The US has also asked permission from the Czech Republic and received the backing of Czech Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek.   

 

In 2002, the US withdrew from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty it signed with the Soviet Union.  It says a missile defence system could significantly reduce threats from so-called "rogue states" such as Iran and North Korea.

 

 

But Paul Ingram, of the British American Security Information Council, said the success of the system was "a long way from being proven".

 

"Even if it did work, it would be tackling the wrong problem at the wrong time," he told the BBC.  "The proliferation of ballistic missile technology is not as racing away as we are being led to believe. It has no relevance at all when it comes to issues like the war on terror."

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, no, no, no ,no.

 

Time to change things.

 

After World War 2, Europe was weakened. The European imperial powers were demoted from first class to second class powers. Eastern Europe was ruled by the iron fist of the Soviet Union. Us in Western Europe (rightfully) decolonised/lost our empires, but in the process, that meant we couldn't even fart without America's say so.

 

Its time to change this. The Eastern Bloc has gone - there's no need for America to 'protect' us or influence us.

 

Britain, France, Holland, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Germany - we're all in the same boat. First class colonial superpowers demoted following World War 2, but in the EU, we've all come together along with other Western European nations, and now the Eastern countries are joining up.

 

This is the way it has to be now - if we stand together, we're f*cking strong, and we don't need to be subjugated by the United States.

 

I'm not in any way suggesting we fight them, of course we should seek good relations with them, but we should not be subjugated by them.

 

Europe can provide a strong power bloc to rival the US. China is up and coming as well. If we want to be powerful, then Britain, or France, or Germany, or any other European country cannot do it alone. I'm not advocating a EU superstate or USE or anything like that, just us all standing and working together as the EU.

 

Poland, the Czech Republic and ourselves should all say no - its just another way of the US trying to use us and subjugate us some more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No it's not. It would just take a government with a bit of backbone to explain that we're not allowing our country to be used to spy on ourselves and others, and we're not going to host a bunch of missile systems that will do more to make us a target than they will do to protect us.

 

There might be reasons we want to share / host radar facilities with the US, but the whole notion that we allow them to run electronic surveillance and don't even ask them what they're doing is ridiculous.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No it's not. It would just take a government with a bit of backbone to explain that we're not allowing our country to be used to spy on ourselves and others, and we're not going to host a bunch of missile systems that will do more to make us a target than they will do to protect us.

 

There might be reasons we want to share / host radar facilities with the US, but the whole notion that we allow them to run electronic surveillance and don't even ask them what they're doing is ridiculous.

 

We're so far in their pockets it is sickening.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No it's not. It would just take a government with a bit of backbone to explain that we're not allowing our country to be used to spy on ourselves and others, and we're not going to host a bunch of missile systems that will do more to make us a target than they will do to protect us.

 

There might be reasons we want to share / host radar facilities with the US, but the whole notion that we allow them to run electronic surveillance and don't even ask them what they're doing is ridiculous.

 

Ah, but, we don't have a backbone.  I know what it would take for things to be different, we all do, thing is, it never is different and it IS inevitable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here get this, Tony "the twat" Blair actually asked begged the US for the missiles to be based here and they said no!!

 

He's such a sickening cunt, a proper embarrassment.

 

Britain ruled out as 'son of Star Wars' base

 

 

Richard Norton-Taylor

Wednesday February 28, 2007

The Guardian

 

Defence officials yesterday poured cold water over suggestions from Downing Street that the US could base missile interceptors in Britain as part of its controversial "son of Star Wars" project.

 

It emerged last week that Tony Blair had asked the US to consider Britain as a launching pad for US interceptors. However, defence officials described the prospect as "extremely unlikely". John Rood, US assistant secretary of state for international security, told a Royal United Services Institute conference in London yesterday that they wanted Poland to be a base for American missile interceptors in silos and that a new radar for the missile defence system would be based in the Czech Republic.

 

British and US defence officials made it clear the UK would be party to the project through the upgraded early warning radar at Fylingdales and the US satellite eavesdropping and monitoring station at Menwith Hill. Lieutenant General Henry Obering, director of the US missile defence agency, told the conference Fylingdales will be "integrated" into the US missile defence system this year and he hoped it would be fully integrated into the eastern European part of America's missile defence system by 2012.

 

 

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianpolitics/story/0,,2022921,00.html

 

I can't wait for him to fuck off, hopefully Brown will change things significantly - I say hopefully, but I don't hold much out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Invicta_Toon

people not understanding the NATO principle then?

 

any state attacking the US with ballistic missiles would have to attack the NATO states aswell

 

while NATO exists (definitely a case for disbandment nowadays), id' quite like to be 'under the umbrella' :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

people not understanding the NATO principle then?

 

any state attacking the US with ballistic missiles would have to attack the NATO states aswell

 

while NATO exists (definitely a case for disbandment nowadays), id' quite like to be 'under the umbrella' :lol:

 

Personally I think the NATO collective security thing is a decent concept, but I think we should boot the US out because they cause too much trouble. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Invicta_Toon

people not understanding the NATO principle then?

 

any state attacking the US with ballistic missiles would have to attack the NATO states aswell

 

while NATO exists (definitely a case for disbandment nowadays), id' quite like to be 'under the umbrella' :lol:

 

Personally I think the NATO collective security thing is a decent concept, but I think we should boot the US out because they cause too much trouble. :lol:

 

EUTO it is then :lol:

 

catapults at the ready!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

people not understanding the NATO principle then?

 

any state attacking the US with ballistic missiles would have to attack the NATO states aswell

 

while NATO exists (definitely a case for disbandment nowadays), id' quite like to be 'under the umbrella' :lol:

 

Personally I think the NATO collective security thing is a decent concept, but I think we should boot the US out because they cause too much trouble. :lol:

 

EUTO it is then :lol:

 

catapults at the ready!!!

 

:laugh:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Saved yer asses in WWII, etc. etc. Ungrateful Brits, blah blah. :hunter:

 

[/average american]

 

Entire system's completely useless, anyway. Who, exactly, has the capability of sending ICBMs across Europe to hit us, anyway? If China ever goes to war with the US, the attack'll come from across the Pacific. Other than them, and maybe North Korea, there's no credible ICBM threat left in the world. Not to mention that the Star Wars technology is dodgy at best and is still yet to prove that it's even capable of intercepting an incoming missile to begin with. Biut who cares? Let's shell out another few billion dollars on it instead of fixing our domestic problems.

 

*sigh*

Link to post
Share on other sites

Saved yer asses in WWII, etc. etc. Ungrateful Brits, blah blah. :hunter:

 

[/average american]

 

Entire system's completely useless, anyway. Who, exactly, has the capability of sending ICBMs across Europe to hit us, anyway? If China ever goes to war with the US, the attack'll come from across the Pacific. Other than them, and maybe North Korea, there's no credible ICBM threat left in the world. Not to mention that the Star Wars technology is dodgy at best and is still yet to prove that it's even capable of intercepting an incoming missile to begin with. Biut who cares? Let's shell out another few billion dollars on it instead of fixing our domestic problems.

 

*sigh*

 

George's mates don't own stuff that could fix your domestic problems though. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Invicta_Toon

A polite 'thanks but no thanks' is in order to our British troop slaying 'friends' in Washington is in order here.

 

If that doesn't work a simple 'fuck off' should suffice.

 

we asked them numpty

Link to post
Share on other sites

A polite 'thanks but no thanks' is in order to our British troop slaying 'friends' in Washington is in order here.

 

If that doesn't work a simple 'fuck off' should suffice.

 

we asked them numpty

 

Welcome back Vic.... :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

A polite 'thanks but no thanks' is in order to our British troop slaying 'friends' in Washington is in order here.

 

If that doesn't work a simple 'f*** off' should suffice.

 

Vic who do you mean by 'we'?

 

This all seems to be Blair's personal project. I don't see anyone else asking the yanks for this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The UK and US have held high level talks on the possibility of putting a "Son of Star Wars" anti-ballistic missile defence system on British soil.

 

An article in The Economist claims Prime Minister Tony Blair has lobbied President George Bush for the system.  But government sources have told the BBC that talks are "to keep Britain's options open", not a lobbying effort.  Russia has said the system, which tracks and destroys missiles launched at the US, will trigger an arms race.  Poland and the Czech Republic have both been approached by America about locating part of the hugely expensive system on their soil.

 

Secret talks

 

BBC Defence Correspondent Paul Wood said he had confirmed "secret high-level negotiations" had been taking place.  Talks were continuing between the National Security Council and Britain's top foreign affairs adviser Sir Nigel Sheinwald, he said.  But Downing Street has said talks are at a very early stage, and were intended only to keep Britain in consideration as plans were developed.

 

David Rennie, from the Economist, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme his understanding was that Mr Blair had "personally led" efforts for silos to be based in the UK, believing it would make Britain safer.  The system uses radar and satellites to detect enemy missile launches and to guide interceptors to their targets.    Shadow defence secretary Liam Fox said the Conservatives would not oppose locating part of the system in the UK, but wanted to examine it in detail.

 

'Get honest'

 

"We have had no details at all from the government despite asking a lot of questions in Parliament.  If the government really do want to maintain what they regard as a bipartisan approach to defence in this country, they better start getting honest with the opposition," said Mr Fox.

 

Poland has recently confirmed the US wants to use its territory to build part of its missile defence base.  The US has also asked permission from the Czech Republic and received the backing of Czech Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek.   

 

In 2002, the US withdrew from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty it signed with the Soviet Union.  It says a missile defence system could significantly reduce threats from so-called "rogue states" such as Iran and North Korea.

 

 

But Paul Ingram, of the British American Security Information Council, said the success of the system was "a long way from being proven".

 

"Even if it did work, it would be tackling the wrong problem at the wrong time," he told the BBC.  "The proliferation of ballistic missile technology is not as racing away as we are being led to believe. It has no relevance at all when it comes to issues like the war on terror."

 

Man, (assuming) do you EVER have an opinion of your own about these things or are you just some kind of leech that spends their life hanging off other peoples work?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...