So President Obama Says We Have Something Better

President Obama said it’s ok if we scrap the missile defense system that we have spent billions of dollars developing, testing, and perfecting because we have something better.

Really? I call bullshit.

There is nothing better than our current missile defense system. We know it works because we have tested it over and over again. We have spent many years and billions of dollars publicly testing and perfecting our land based missile defense system. We tested it publicly as a show of force so all hostiles knew what our capabilities were. It sent a message that we could shoot down anything they shot at us or our allies.

And we have just dismantled it in Europe.

So we have something better? Why haven’t we read anything in the news that we were testing a new mobile missile defense shield? That’s because Obama pulled the entire idea out of his butt at the last minute, which is why we are just hearing about it now. He had to say something, anything to explain why he is scrapping this defense system, and admitting that he wants to appease Vladimir Putin wouldn’t go over well with 75% of the American public.

And this new system that he says is so wonderful won’t be phased in for another two years and won’t be fully operational until 2020. I bet we’ll see all kinds of delays on top of that, too.

Why are we abandoning something we know works now for something that will take an additional 2-11 years to implement?

If he wants to invest in a mobile missile defense shield, then fine. But you do not dismantle the defense shield and leave yourself and your allies exposed for years while you figure out how the the new system will work. Here’s the realty: we have never tested any missile defense systems from ships. We have no idea how well it will work.

Michael Goldfarb at The Weekly Standard has much more:

The White House has put out a “fact sheet” on their policy of Russian appeasement/missile defense surrender. The fact sheet says that the new approach — focusing on SM-3 and sea-based systems (presumably in Turkey) — will “augment our current protection of the U.S. homeland against long-range ballistic missile threats.” That is a lie. This system will provide zero, nada, zilch protection to the U.S. homeland, providing only defense against short- and medium-range missiles to Europe.

The fact sheet says this system will protect “our Allies in Europe sooner and more comprehensively than the previous program, and involves more flexible and survivable systems.” That is a lie. The system that was being placed in Poland is already operational in Alaska. These new plans will now take years of negotations to implement and will necessarily be less survivable as they will not be underground.

The fact sheet says that “The Czech Republic and Poland, as close, strategic and steadfast Allies of the United States, will be central to our continued consultations with NATO Allies on our defense against the growing ballistic missile threat.” That is a lie. The Czechs and Poles get a midnight phone call from the president while Tauscher is already in the air. They were not consulted with and have been given no assurances — because the president is selling them out.

The fact sheet says, “We also welcome Russian cooperation to bring its missile defense capabilities into a broader defense of our common strategic interests.” If that’s true, our president is totally clueless about Russian capabilities and intentions — even Bush, who looked into Putin’s soul, was not so delusional as to think U.S. missile defense could be dependent on Russian good will and cooperation. How long til the Russians threaten to throw us out of our “joint” missile defense facilities in order to coerce us into staying out of an attack on Georgia or some other democratic state in their near abroad.

This is a decision based purely on ideology and the good soldiers on the JCS and and at the Pentagon have no choice but to go along for the ride. At least the president ought to be honest about what this means and stop the smears of missile defense.

How To Lose An Election
Another Distortion and Attempt to Defend ACORN by Attacking the Messenger