US planning missile bases in Poland: report

[DRS]

WARSAW — The United States aims to establish missile bases in Poland, after having scrapped plans fiercely opposed by Russia to deploy a missile shield in the country, a Polish newspaper reported Friday.

Citing Polish diplomatic sources who spoke on condition of anonymity, Gazeta Wyborcza said Washington aimed to set up a permanent short- and medium-range missile base as well as deploy mobile missile batteries.

The plan is set to take shape within days, said Gazeta Wyborcza, a leading daily that is considered well informed on the issue.

It said Andrzej Kremer, Poland's deputy foreign minister, was due to travel to Washington on Monday.

No comment was available Friday from Poland's foreign ministry.

On September 17, US President Barack Obama decided to halt a drive launched by the previous administration of George W. Bush to deploy by 2013 missile interceptors in Poland and a powerful tracking radar in the neighbouring Czech Republic.

Washington had said the plan aimed to ward off threats from Iran, but Russia blasted it as a menace to its security on its doorstep. Warsaw and Prague broke from the crumbling communist bloc in 1989 and joined NATO in 1999.

Obama announced that he had decided to replace the shield with a more mobile system using mainly sea-based missile interceptors.

In turn, Russia decided to freeze a move to deploy short-range missiles in its Kaliningrad territory, sandwiched between Poland and Lithuania.

Last week, US Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Washington was still aiming to deploy missiles in Poland and the Czech Republic in 2015, even though Iran's long-range missile programme remained further off than previously thought.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hA7WoPVXcxw-GOHPKT-2IO6KwnCA

Let's see this seems to make everyone happy, maybe that is why this has not been posted.

[wildcat87]

This should make the Polish happy as their concern was Russia, not Iran.

[Vaard]

Sorry... talking points have not yet been issued on this subject by right-wing radio; thus no one is able to respond.

"obama appeases poland, scared of russia"

[johnrocks]

"obama appeases poland, scared of russia"

lol

[pattyk]

so, if I'm understanding, now we are going to put actual missles there, as opposed to missle defense?

[Jagergeist]

"obama appeases poland, scared of russia"

:))

Wait for it... wait for it....

[Long Island Bob]

we'll see what happens when the russians object

[Mojotiger]

Is Poland paying for these missiles or this more welfare?

[Creefer]

Whew, I thought we might run out of military installations sometime soon, but it seems Bush's third term is going just fine.

[johnrocks]

Whew, I thought we might run out of military installations sometime soon, but it seems Bush's third term is going just fine.

Little Change
Even less Hope.

[Long Island Bob]

Is Poland paying for these missiles or this more welfare?

it is welfare (the Poles are giving us welfare)
we are not paying for the misslie sites
they remain our missiles operated by our men at our disposal to defend us.

the whole operation becomes a lot cheaper
because we can use smaller-ranged missles deployed a lot closer to the targets.

perhaps you think they should send us a bill.
they are so stupid they think this is the sort of thing allies should do for each other.

[Jagergeist]

Is Poland paying for these missiles or this more welfare?

I'm wondering the same thing. I have a feeling that it will be more of the same, a costly waste of American taxpayer money to support European defense. Liberals who will want to shovel more money out to be friends to the world and conservatives who want to do the same so they can claim they are strong on defense.

Madness.

[Mojotiger]

it is welfare (the Poles are giving us welfare)
we are not paying for the misslie sites
they remain our missiles operated by our men at our disposal to defend us.

the whole operation becomes a lot cheaper
because we can use smaller-ranged missles deployed a lot closer to the targets.

perhaps you think they should send us a bill.

So we should thank Poland for letting us defend them?

[DRS]

so, if I'm understanding, now we are going to put actual missles there, as opposed to missle defense?

Missle defence involves missles.

Instead of putting them near the border or Russia they are putting them near to Iran.

[johnrocks]

I'm wondering the same thing. I have a feeling that it will be more of the same, a costly waste of American taxpayer money to support European defense. Liberals who will want to shovel more money out to be friends to the world and conservatives who want to do the same so they can claim they are strong on defense.

Madness.

Both now have the same foreign policy views concerning the world, about the only difference is, the "conservatives" want to project an image like Marshall Dillion and the Liberals had rather project Mr. Rogers.

[DRS]

Whew, I thought we might run out of military installations sometime soon, but it seems Bush's third term is going just fine.

Actaully Japan is suppose to be talking to the US about cutting down their prescence their and letting Asia deal with North Korea

[Long Island Bob]

So we should thank Poland for letting us defend them?

No we should thank poland for letting us defend ourselves at their expense.

Without Poland's welfare
the missiles would bw expensive ICBMs.

Because poland is giving us free use of their land and making themmselves a target, we can instead deploy short and medium range missiles . . . which are much cheaper and more effective.

[Jagergeist]

it is welfare (the Poles are giving us welfare)
we are not paying for the misslie sites
they remain our missiles operated by our men at our disposal to defend us.

the whole operation becomes a lot cheaper
because we can use smaller-ranged missles deployed a lot closer to the targets.

perhaps you think they should send us a bill.

The aggravating thing is that when Bush announced this plan there was nothing in there about American defense. It was all about defending Europe from a rouge nuclear attack. Now that conservatives, who bitch nonstop about out of control spending, are on the case it has morphed into an argument that it really protects the US. Good lord, Iran doesn't even have a working nuclear weapon or long range missile! We are wasting money for a threat not yet out there, to defend people who don't want defending, using money we don't have. Stop with the argument it's about us and just say it was a dumb idea from the start.

I sleep soundly at night knowing the USAF is closely monitoring potential launch sites, just like it has done for the past 40 years, with satellite technology.

[Jagergeist]

Both now have the same foreign policy views concerning the world, about the only difference is, the "conservatives" want to project an image like Marshall Dillion and the Liberals had rather project Mr. Rogers.

Pretty much. And both are desperate to control the federal wallet to accomplish their makeovers.

[Mojotiger]

No we should thank poland for letting us defend ourselves at their expense.

Without Poland's welfare
the missiles would bw expensive ICBMs.

Because poland is giving us free use of their land and making themmselves a target, we can instead deploy short and medium range missiles . . . which are much cheaper and more effective.

Hmmm. Exactly who are the missiles in Poland going to protect us from? Iran?

[Long Island Bob]

The aggravating thing is that when Bush announced this plan there was nothing in there about American defense. It was all about defending Europe from a rouge nuclear attack. Now that conservatives, who bitch nonstop about out of control spending, are on the case it has morphed into an argument that it really protects the US. Good lord, Iran doesn't even have a working nuclear weapon or long range missile! We are wasting money for a threat not yet out there, to defend people who don't want defending, using money we don't have. Stop with the argument it's about us and just say it was a dumb idea from the start.

I sleep soundly at night knowing the USAF is closely monitoring potential launch sites, just like it has done for the past 40 years, with satellite technology.

I didn't hear bush's announcement.

everything I read said the missile defense was to defend the US and Europe against soon-to-be-developed Iranian missiles


indeed if Iranian missiles were to target the US they would first fly directly over poland

see attached

[Mr. M]

The aggravating thing is that when Bush announced this plan there was nothing in there about American defense. It was all about defending Europe from a rouge nuclear attack.

You might want to pass that information off to the NYT...


By MICHAEL R. GORDON
Published: May 22, 2006

WASHINGTON, May 21 — The Bush administration is moving to establish a new antimissile site in Europe that would be designed to stop attacks by Iran against the United States and its European allies.

The administration's proposal, which comes amid rising concerns about Iran's suspected program to develop nuclear weapons, calls for installing 10 antimissile interceptors at a European site by 2011. Poland and the Czech Republic are among the nations under consideration.

[Long Island Bob]

Hmmm. Exactly who are the missiles in Poland going to protect us from? Iran?
anyone in range

the AGM-84D was first introduced in 1977
the M39 dates back to 1983
the SM-65 Atlas dates back to 1957
the Titan 1 dates back to 1962


were it not for the Poles giving us free land and making themselves a target,
as these get replaced they'd cost us a lot more

[E7ALR]

So 10 silo mounted (hard to reload) missiles, specificially designed to hit high altitude missiles, but not very effective against low flying targets (like tactical strike air craft) ****ed off the Russians. But a larger number of dual capability, rapidly reloadable, mobile tactical Air Defense Missile Batteries won't upset the Russians?

[wildcat87]

So 10 silo mounted (hard to reload) missiles, specificially designed to hit high altitude missiles, but not very effective against low flying targets (like tactical strike air craft) ****ed off the Russians. But a larger number of dual capability, rapidly reloadable, mobile tactical Air Defense Missile Batteries won't upset the Russians?

Basically we're buying Polish troop support for Afghanistan imho....

Wonder why Sean and Rush and Glenn and the MSM haven't mentioned these missiles. Anyone have any ideas?

[PSBandit]

Missiles that BHO wants gone.... nuke free world?

[E7ALR]

Basically we're buying Polish troop support for Afghanistan imho....

Wonder why Sean and Rush and Glenn and the MSM haven't mentioned these missiles. Anyone have any ideas?And what does PBO say when the Russians start complaining that we are deploying systems that actually will have capabilites against Russian forces? Does he think he's going to get that support against Iran when the Russian Generals point out to Putin that the new planned systems really are battlefield systems that can interdict Russina tactical air forces?

[wildcat87]

Missiles that BHO wants gone.... nuke free world?

Are the new Polish installations nuclear?

[wildcat87]

And what does PBO say when the Russians start complaining that we are deploying systems that actually will have capabilites against Russian forces? Does he think he's going to get that support against Iran when the Russian Generals point out to Putin that the new planned systems really are battlefield systems that can interdict Russina tactical air forces?

There's no way this wasn't run by the Russians as it came out the same day as the Iran news.

[brody]

But, Obama said...

[TinCan]

Now that the world is going to "disarm," why do we need a missle shield?

Or are they going to use the metal in the missles to make real shields?

It's all so confusing.

[wildcat87]

But, Obama said...

Said what? That Gates recommended we change strategies from missile shield to:


In one of the biggest national security reversals of his young presidency, Mr. Obama canceled former President George W. Bush’s plans to station a radar facility in the Czech Republic and 10 ground-based interceptors in Poland. Instead, he plans to deploy smaller SM-3 interceptors by 2011, first aboard ships and later in Europe, possibly even in Poland or the Czech Republic.



http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/18/world/europe/18shield.html

[wildcat87]

Now that the world is going to "disarm," why do we need a missle shield?

Or are they going to use the metal in the missles to make real shields?

It's all so confusing.

This is about Poles and Czechs and their anxiety over Russia. That's it.

[TinCan]

So, does that mean the Russians are going to let us station warships in the Black Sea?

[TinCan]

This is about Poles and Czechs and their anxiety over Russia. That's it.

So, it's not a national security issue, gotcha.

[PaleoPaul]

But...like Obama was like finally like listening to like Ron Paul!! Like Libertarians are like evil and like in bed with like Progressives/Socialists!!! Lyke OMG!!1ONE111!!!!

/end of Talk Radio Talking Point


Seriously, though...NOW do you think RP and BO are the same?

[wildcat87]

So, it's not a national security issue, gotcha.

I didn't say that. In fact I specifically said this is help make sure the Poles stay in Afghanistan.

[wildcat87]

But...like Obama was like finally like listening to like Ron Paul!! Like Libertarians are like evil and like in bed with like Progressives/Socialists!!! Lyke OMG!!1ONE111!!!!

/end of Talk Radio Talking Point


Seriously, though...NOW do you think RP and BO are the same?

Or GWB and BHO...

[joeschmoe]

Obama announced that he had decided to replace the shield with a more mobile system using mainly sea-based missile interceptors.

Last week, US Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Washington was still aiming to deploy missiles in Poland and the Czech Republic in 2015, even though Iran's long-range missile programme remained further off than previously thought.


So it looks like the White House is not talking to the defense secretary. From what you stated above, it looks like the U.S. is going to have double the missile shield that the Bush administration had planned with both mobile and permanent locations.

Once again, no one seems to know what is going on in this administration. But hey, at least there a whole lot of platitudinous speeches going on all over the place.

http://forums.hannity.com/picture.php?albumid=2371&pictureid=27281

[E7ALR]

There's no way this wasn't run by the Russians as it came out the same day as the Iran news.Oh really?

[wildcat87]

So it looks like the White House is not talking to the defense secretary. From what you stated above, it looks like the U.S. is going to have double the missile shield that the Bush administration had planned with both mobile and permanent locations.

Once again, no one seems to know what is going on in this administration.

http://forums.hannity.com/picture.php?albumid=2371&pictureid=27281

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/18/world/europe/18shield.html

Not exactly

[wildcat87]

Oh really?

We'll see.

[TinCan]

I didn't say that. In fact I specifically said this is help make sure the Poles stay in Afghanistan.

Yep, not to diminish their contribution but in light of the U.S. Commander requesting 30-40K more U.S. troops, are the 2K Poles that vital to the overall conditions that are being faced right now? Granted, unlike other members of NATO, they at least provide "shooters" and some pretty "kick ass" SF types.

[TinCan]

Or GWB and BHO...

It doesn't matter because everyone knows that Biden is the "real" power behind the administrations foreign policy agenda, right?

[wildcat87]

Yep, not to diminish their contribution but in light of the U.S. Commander requesting 30-40K more U.S. troops, are the 2K Poles that vital to the overall conditions that are being faced right now?

I think every fighting man on the ground that's not an American is a good thing for the commander, but I also think it gives more international legitimacy to the operations there. Bush sure used it that way and so would any President.


Granted, unlike other members of NATO, they at least provide "shooters" and some pretty "kick ass" SF types.

Good to know.

[wildcat87]

It doesn't matter because everyone knows that Biden is the "real" power behind the administrations foreign policy agenda, right?

Okay, that's pretty funny. If that's true God help us all...

[Crossriflesonblue]

You think the Poles are going to line up to be thrown under the bus again?....not likely....

[TinCan]

I think every fighting man on the ground that's not an American is a good thing for the commander, but I also think it gives more international legitimacy to the operations there. Bush sure used it that way and so would any President.


No, quite a few of our "allies" used A-stan that way because they refused to support OIF after they lost their "Oil for Food" deals. And by using the NATO shield, they get to use our "shooters" to protect their troops.

This has breakdown of troops and responsibilities and note those of our allies' governments that basically forbid combat action for their troops.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Security_Assistance_Force

[TinCan]

Okay, that's pretty funny. If that's true God help us all...

That's why he was picked for VP, right? :)

[wildcat87]

No, quite a few of our "allies" used A-stan that way because they refused to support OIF after they lost their "Oil for Food" deals. And by using the NATO shield, they get to use our "shooters" to protect their troops.

This has breakdown of troops and responsibilities and note those of our allies' governments that basically forbid combat action for their troops.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Security_Assistance_Force

Since we're specifically talking about Poland- from that Wiki page


Poland has reached a preliminary agreement with NATO partners on expanding its role in Afghanistan by taking over command of an eastern province, Poland's defence minister said.[citation needed] So at the moment Poland and USA is leading a PRT Ghazni according to the official website of the NATO-ISAF.[11]


Poland – 2000 as of May 2009,[49] most of whom operate in the south-eastern provinces of Ghazni and Paktika. An unknown number of Polish special forces are deployed in the flashpoint southern province of Kandahar. Additionally, 400 soldiers and eight helicopters (four Mil Mi-17 and four Mil Mi-24) are to be sent in 2008. On 19 April, Poland took over Ghazni Province in east Afghanistan. The President of Poland announced on April 8 that 320 additional combat troops would be sent to safeguard elections.

and then there is this
http://www.polskieradio.pl/thenews/international/artykul116548_poland_reconsidering_afghanistan.htm l

[TinCan]

Like I said, they're one of the few to actually send shooters but 2-3K vs 35-40K?????????? Not to mention the doubling of the U.S. force if they can get Biden to consult his crystal ball and agree.

[wildcat87]

Like I said, they're one of the few to actually send shooters but 2-3K vs 35-40K?????????? Not to mention the doubling of the U.S. force if they can get Biden to consult his crystal ball and agree.

Biden aside, as we were the ones to actually get hit by Afghanistan based AQ it makes sense for us to have the most troops. I still say get OBL and the leadership of AQ and get out of there.

[wildcat87]

in other missile defense news

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090925/ap_on_sc/us_rocket_launch;_ylt=AhtYExyndqW.GcmbqKX4IdKs0NUE ;_ylu=X3oDMTFlZWFwODFxBHBvcwMxMjEEc2VjA2FjY29yZGlv bl9zY2llbmNlBHNsawN1c3NlbmRzMm1pc3M-


CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. – Two satellites are heading to orbit as part of a missile defense program demonstration.
The pair was launched aboard a Delta 2 rocket on Friday morning as part of the Space Tracking and Surveillance System demonstration for the U.S. Missile Defense Agency.
According to Bob Bishop, media relations manager for satellite developer Northrop Grumman, the satellites will demonstrate technology that can detect infrared and visible light from missiles launched from earth. The space surveillance system will provide global tracking for the ballistic missile defense system.
Data from the satellites' onboard sensors will be used by the military to intercept missile targets.

[wildcat87]

bump

[XTankLt]

Said what? That Gates recommended we change strategies from missile shield to:



http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/18/world/europe/18shield.html

Over to Ships first?

OK, I'll ask for the third time.

The ships with these missiles were planned to be used to defend the fleet and Carrier groups.


Is Obama allocating funds to build additional ships to defend our allies? Or, will he sending out a carrier group on extended missions?

[wildcat87]

Over to Ships first?

OK, I'll ask for the third time.

The ships with these missiles were planned to be used to defend the fleet and Carrier groups.


Is Obama allocating funds to build additional ships to defend our allies? Or, will he sending out a carrier group on extended missions?

Good question. Here's the info so far


Remarking that the earlier-envisioned system in Poland and the Czech Republic would not have been operative until 2015 and that opposition among both nations' parliamentarians would have delayed the process at least another two years, Gates evinced both impatience with and far grander designs for the European wing of the U.S.'s global missile shield program by asserting, "President Obama...decided to discard that plan in favor of a vastly more suitable approach. In the first phase, to be completed by 2011, we will deploy proven, sea-based SM-3 interceptor missiles - weapons that are growing in capability...."

The new deployments, which will be examined in depth later, are to be more mobile and less capable of being anticipated and defended against; will be implemented, according to Gates' own schedule, at least eight years ahead of the prior plan's timeline; and will extend worldwide missile interceptor networks into far broader swathes of Eurasia, the Middle East and ultimately the planet as a whole.

Even in the first phase of the adapted - advanced - system that Gates first described on September 17, more developed technologies are to supplant what are already outdated ones that would have been applied to the Polish and Czech deployments. "[A] fixed radar site like the one previously envisioned for the Czech Republic would be far less adaptable than the airborne, space- and ground-based sensors we now plan to use."

The new system, in addition to being more effective and quickly operationalized, will be much grander in scope and will include several times as many missiles as those intended for Poland, although that nation will still host different variants of medium-range interceptor missiles and, as Gates states below, will still eventually station long-range ground-based missiles.

"The second phase, which will become operational around 2015, will involve putting upgraded SM-3s [Standard Missile-3s] on the ground in Southern and Central Europe. All told, every phase of this plan will include scores of SM-3 missiles, as opposed to the old plan of just 10 ground-based interceptors....[O]ur military will continue research and development on a two-stage ground-based interceptor, the kind that was planned to be put in Poland, as a back-up."

.....

As part of these plans for a U.S.-dominated worldwide navy with missile interception at its core, the United States has already recruited NATO and Asian NATO allies like Norway, Spain, Japan and South Korea into the Aegis combat system with its SM-3 missile shield capacity. India is slated to be the next partner.

Robert Gates also mentioned the application of SM-3s for ground use and the Pentagon will now base them both on land and more extensively at sea.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15408

[Crossriflesonblue]

Good question. Here's the info so far


http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15408

The SM-3 Block II wasn't slated to be ready be ready until 2020.......and it is going to be much more expensive to deploy than the limited shield proposed by the Bush Administration......course Bush wasn't in any hurry to appease the Russians....prior to any START negotiations...

[wildcat87]

somehow I missed these statements in the US media

http://www.canada.com/news/Ties+unharmed+decision+missile+shield+Poland+Czech/2004715/story.html


WARSAW - Polish and Czech leaders insisted Thursday that ties with the United States would remain strong despite U.S. President Barack Obama's decision to shelve a missile shield plan in their countries.

"I received President Obama's words and declarations with great satisfaction," Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said following telephone talks with Obama.

"The words I've heard from President Barack Obama — after the change in the decision on the matter of the missile shield — Poland has the opportunity to gain an exclusive position," Tusk said.

Obama's new project still offered "a chance to improve European security taking Poland into particular consideration," he said.

"I wouldn't say it is a failure of Poland, I will also say that because where we are geographically, we'll always have to work on our security," Tusk said, underscoring its proximity to Russia.

"Our relations with the United States and the talk and negotiations are bringing effects, different ones than were expected but ones beneficial to Poland," he added.

Czech President Vaclav Klaus also brushed off any concerns about the decision's impact on relations with the United States.

"This decision of the American government did not come as a surprise to those who closely followed the signals over recent months," Klaus said in Prague.

"I'm 100 per cent convinced that this decision of the American government does not signal a cooling of relations between the United States and the Czech Republic," Klaus said.

[MrShotShot]

Glad to see that the left is so "pro-missiles in Europe" now.

Too bad they weren't so in the 80s - would have made Reagan's life a lot easier.