If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.

Options

Hoon Accepts US Defence Missles.

Former Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru

January 2003 in Politics & Debate

Hoon Accepts US Defence Missiles
Britain has accepted a vital role in the controversial US missile shield project, Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon has told MPs. It has agreed to a US request to use Flyingdales radar station in North Yorkshire as part of the "son of Star Wars" project.Mr Hoon said the move would not prejudice the UK's interests but would represent "an invaluable extra insurance" for the country.

I've heard the argument against this...it makes the UK a target. I think the UK is already a target. It would track a missle coming toward the UK via satellite and communications systems. Then a missle would be shot to intercept the in-coming missle. What do all of you think?

Comments

Options
Former Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru

January 2003

Basically I disagree with the whole idea because:

a) It will fuel a new arms race- from Russia to China to Iran, many countries will seek ways to beat the shield that will invariably involve increasing the number of warheads per missile and investing in new missile and weapons technology.

b) It will raise tensions worldwide and make many nations nervous. The possibility of a USA that is immune to an attack is a worrying prospect for many, considering the policy of aggression and bullying it has carried out while is vulnerable to retaliation.

c) It will make Britain the first target of any projected attack on US soil

d) All of these issues will be created for nothing: the shield is unlikely to work. Some warheads will invariably get through and this is only if 20 missiles are involved. A mass attack of 100 missiles or more would get through it like a hot knife through butter.

But this was one of the selling points of Bush at the election, and no doubt defence contractors are very happy about it.

This was debated a while ago by the way. Here's the thread

0
Options
Former Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru

January 2003

....including the Bin Laden family of Saudi Arabia...they're heavily invested in US defense companies. Thanks for the link.

0
Options
Former Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru

January 2003

I'd agree with the idea if the US had the technology to create satellites with lasers that are infintely more accurate than anti-missiles.
It may fuel an arms race, but then there wouldn't be much point to an arms race if the russkies or chinese would never be able to defeat it.
But for now, missiles are too unreliable when dealing with extremely small targets, and I'd prefer it if Britain wasn't made a bigger target than it already is.

0
Options
Former Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru

January 2003

To me, the worry about an arms race is from a different time. This threat is about terrorists getting missles and launching them at Western countries. In the US, the concern is also over shoulder launched missels that could bring down a passenger plane like Al Qaeda tried to do in Africa, Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan.

0
Options
Former Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru

January 2003

pnj, the types of missiles that such a shield is intended to protect against are not the types of weaponry that terorists would be using or even necessarily have access to.

Sorry, but shoulder launch stingers are not desigend for attacking nation states, they are limited range assault weapons intended to clow up planes and helicopters overhead, nothing more.

This is just good ol armaments sales between two allied powers and one which is both irrelevant to terrorist attack methods as it is to the UK taxpayer footing the bill (and the US taxpayer as well).

0