posted on December 18, 2002 06:05:42 AM new
King Bush the Dumber is now going to have us pay for a missile defense system WHICH HAS NEVER WORKED AND THEORETICALLY AND REALISTICALLY CAN NEVER WORK!!! Yet the American Taxpayer(the poorer ones, not the richer ones) will be required to pony up 100 billion dollars of our money to give to selected Defense contractors to build useless and non-functional items. Why can't we just GIVE them 50 billion dollars and they do nothing...we would save 50 billion and the effect on missile defense would be the same and it would be a whole lot cheaper to "upgrade" periodically.
We should just start cashing our paychecks in $1 dollars bills, making piles on the floor and setting them on fire....at least we would get some heat for our money.
.................................................
We call them our heroes...but we pay them like chumps
[ edited by mlecher on Dec 18, 2002 07:56 AM ]
Our Leader is working tirelessly for a successful completion of the bankruptcy that Reagan and his father failed to achieve. But there's no need to worry since we'll all soon be assimilated into the glorious new corporate state with its perpetual war machine and parody of capitalism and freedom.
Our only recompense will be the eventual but inevitable purging of the neoconservative philosophers, fundamental evangelicals, and talk radio propagandists, that unholy trinity that will no longer be of use to the State to which they played Faust.
posted on December 18, 2002 10:54:22 AM new
Theoretically can't work? Theoretically anything can work.
Explain your theory why a missle defense realistically can't work! With improved technology there's no reason to expect it not to work. What are the details of the problems which you state it has never worked in the past!
How are the rich taxpayers avoiding paying for this? Is there a seperate fund between rich and poor?
Even if it doesn't work, it still means progess and experimentalism towards a system that will work further down the road. Technical innovation often starts with problems, but that's how we make progress.
posted on December 18, 2002 10:59:08 AM new
You are right about that, mlecher. It would be cheaper to simply hand 50 Billion over to Bush's buddies than to squander the whole 100 Billion.
Have you noticed that the Republican supporters NEVER come into these threads to suipport what Bush is doing or has done? Never. Not once. Instead, they come in to derail the thread or find some other way to disrupt it. Nazi tactics, that.
I doubt that not a single one will come into this thread and defend the missle program; especially after we've linked to and shown how Bush has rigged each of the missle tests with homing devices so that the tests would not fail and how the media has never made a single peep about that fact.
But Republicans who read here are aware of it.
Instead, Republican supporters go on and on about "Morals"; i.e. how Moral that they are. Where's the morality of denying someone a bowl of food to eat and calling them "lazy" compared to Bush handing over 100 Billion to start with to what amounts to and in fact is a Robbery?
Think of all of the good that could be done with that 100 Billion.
We could fulfill Bush's promise to Afghanistan to rebuild it. Heck, with only a single Billion, we could feed and cloth the entire population of that country that year. That would get us their love, instead of the bombs and bullets that we are getting now from the Occupation.
We could rebuild our schools, modernize every classroom in America, a computer tied to the Internet at ever desk for every child - with plenty of lunch money for the low income kids as well.
We could give it back to the lower income taxpayers in order to stimulate the economy. Giving the money to higher-end taxpayers, they would bank the money, not spend it. Poor people would spend it right away on food and housing and clothing. THat would help to jump-start our economy.
The list goes on and on. Instead, Republicans support this blatant Robbery, because that's the morals of their party. Those who aree not Republicans but support this idea are deluded and stupid to say that squandered BILLIONS OF DOLLARS is a good thing. Yes, stupid.
The real question is, is can we afford to keep on going like this? How much longer until our nation collapses under the weight of our debts and our inability to repay those debts?
posted on December 18, 2002 11:04:14 AM new
>Explain your theory why a missle defense realistically can't work!
The technology just isn't there for this sort of thing. Try hitting a bullet with a bullet for comparison. We don't have the know-how to make accurate enough missile exchanges, even with all of our advances. We're not talking about shooting Patriots at slow moving scud missiles, but Inter-Continental sub-orbital missiles going one hellava lot faster than a scud could ever hope to do! Even with the scuds, it worked about 10% to 20% of the time, if I remember those figures rightly. There isn't a chance in hell that we'll ever be able to stop an incoming ballistic missile with another missile. Best to bet on the lotto than to bet on us hitting one.
[ edited by Borillar on Dec 18, 2002 11:06 AM ]
posted on December 18, 2002 11:05:09 AM new
"Our Leader is working tirelessly for a successful completion of the bankruptcy that Reagan and his father failed to achieve. But there's no need to worry since we'll all soon be assimilated into the glorious new corporate state with its perpetual war machine and parody of capitalism and freedom."
Safety of our nation is paramount, and whatever cost it takes it is worth it. Maybe you feel it is better to wait like sitting ducks and they pay billions of dollars to fix what was destroyed when we are attacked. That's a brilliant idea.
To say our President works to bankrupt our country is ignorant. Working to bankrupt our country would only hurt the Republican party, its not ever a goal of any party.
What does parady of capitalism mean? It has made us into the richest nation and strongest military in the world.
posted on December 18, 2002 11:25:52 AM new
Moderizing our schools won't protect our nations from attack.
Bush has rigged the missles with homing devices? Obviously there's more to that story than to deceive. Usually it is a safety measure in case a missle goes astray.
I'm not really a Republican supporter, but I do support some things Republicans do, and supporting a national defense is one of them even if it may have problems, it is progress, and is better than waiting like a sitting duuck.
"Republicans support this blatant Robbery, because that's the morals of their party. Those who aree not Republicans but support this idea are deluded and stupid to say that squandered BILLIONS OF DOLLARS is a good thing. Yes, stupid."
Robbery involves force, what physical force is Bush using? Does he have a gun to our heads? Wow, maybe you're onto something. LOL. Also, how is this squandering? Sounds as if the money is actually being put to use.
Billions of dollars spent actually pumps money into the economy and provides jobs. So it is never a waste of money.
"The real question is, is can we afford to keep on going like this? How much longer until our nation collapses under the weight of our debts and our inability to repay those debts?"
We can afford to go on like this as long as our economy remains strong. Probably another 10 years or so when boomers are retiring and consumption goes down. We should be putting money aside, on the other hand we would have to sacrifice now and that would make us vulnerable as a #1 nation in the world. Our nation won't collapse under debt now because revenue is strong. Those debts, like I said before is money into the economy anfd more jobs. It's like taking a bank loan to expand a business, it is money well spent for growth.
Everyone is entitled to my opinion.
posted on December 18, 2002 11:31:03 AM new
"The technology just isn't there for this sort of thing. Try hitting a bullet with a bullet for comparison. We don't have the know-how to make accurate enough missile exchanges."
You're referring to an older technology that suffered problems. Like the first planes by the Wright brothers, time and money is all it takes for a solution. It is possible because it is a matter of mathematics, speed and distance. Calculate the speed and distance of the oncoming missle and one can predict exact location to strike.
posted on December 18, 2002 11:50:43 AM new
I'm sure you're not up to that task because you know I can counter anything with facts. I know there are technoligcal problems, just like a spaceship to the moon, there are problems even after all these years, yet they still got a spaceship into space (well, not the moon, that was a hoax). Like I said, time and money creates solutions. No one said it would be easy, but we shouldn't give up because the cost of giving up is too high.
I find it amazing you have the time to spread your propaganda but you don't have time to educate us on technological problems that make it impossible for this missle program to work. I think it is more important you give facts that your propagnada.
posted on December 18, 2002 12:12:30 PM new
Krafty
Isn't it amazing that when you strip the doublespeak from the present governments' political actions and ambitions, the bared psychotic obsessions with money and power resemble so closely a script from Edward Albee or another of the school of absurdist playwrights. Who would have ever thought that our political landscape would be almost indistinguishable from a Threatre of the Absurd production, much less that our foreign policy would seem to be modeled on the rationality of Pulp Fiction?
Quickdraw,
I regret that my statements may have alarmed you. Maybe you can take some comfort though in my reassurances that the Busheaucracy would find absolutely no threat whatsoever in you and if you remain appropriately servile, you would likely be rewarded with a warm place by the fire and your very own bowl with your name imprinted on, Citizen #1289Y-23377.
edited for typo
[ edited by antiquary on Dec 18, 2002 12:58 PM ]
posted on December 18, 2002 12:29:10 PM new
Quickdraw...
You live in your very own little world don't you?? You just haven't been paying too much attention to this world.
We really do not have the time nor the energy to educate you on what EVERYONE ELSE ALREADY KNOWS! From statements by the scientists working on the project to the defense contractors themseleves. From the theoretical possibilities to realistic odds. It was almost canned once and the laws of nature and physics have been altered yet.
I have already spent too much time on you. Be Gone thou uneducated mite.......
.................................................
We call them our heroes...but we pay them like chumps
[ edited by mlecher on Dec 18, 2002 12:31 PM ]
posted on December 18, 2002 12:29:28 PM new
>I find it amazing you have the time to spread your propaganda but you don't have time to educate us on technological problems that make it impossible for this missle program to work. I think it is more important you give facts that your propagnada.
What you find amazing is that I won't take your bait. You have never shown a willingness to rationally discuss any issue. You have on every occasion avoided answering any question or statement of fact that disagrees with your position. You want to hang onto your position and no matter what anyone has to say and no matter what facts come about, you refuse to discuss it and ignore it. Your actions are childish and pointless to discuss anything with you. You can stuff that into your oblique.
posted on December 18, 2002 05:53:55 PM new
Do I live in my own little world? Unfortunately not, I live on earth and I am an earthling. Not sure what it would matter if I did live in my own world because obviously I am connected to earth (otherwise how would I be here posting a message?) so I do pick up all the news.
Considering I read tons of news, I have been paying quite a bit of attention to what happens in this world. It just shows how far off base your assumptions are and how you lack credibility for saying something without basis to back you up.
"Everyone knows."
Really? Care to take a poll and see if everyone knows about this issue? I'm betting the majority do not know, and the one's who do, know very little. Apparently since you know so much, take just a minute and tell us what you do know, and then what I'll do is do some research to prove you wrong if that is the case. I feel you are afraid to stand out on a limb and be proven false, once again as I have done with Borillar in the past. She states I haven't, but you can research past posts where did.
If you have statements from these scientists, and defense contractors saying this project has no merit, show how greast you are and publish these, they should be readily available on the web. Of course it may just be a few of their opinions so what I'll do is find scientists who have an opposing view and report back.
posted on December 18, 2002 06:24:27 PM new
I saved you time, I already found and read some scientists views. Basically they don't know for sure when the missle defense will be up to par, may take longer than the 2004 set date. Which is fine, it's a new technology and it takes time to perfect it.
However, lets look at some more details:
"Of course we're not going to deploy a system that doesn't work," said President Bush, "what good will that do?" How effective does the administration deem worthy for a missile defense system that will easily cost over $100 billion. How high a standard is the protection of America placed? "0.7 percent success. That's plenty," said Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld. It means that if two missiles are shot at the U.S. there is a 50-50 chance of losing at least one city. "30 percent failure for any national defense system could be plenty.
The Department of Defense has conducted several tests of missile defense prototypes. The most recent shot down three missiles out of five."
The Patriot missle in the Gulf was had a success rate of 30-70%.
What is the success rate of having no missle defense? Zero. 100 Billion to save millions of lives seems worth it to me. Saving 100 Billion and losing millions of lives does not seem worth it.
posted on December 18, 2002 06:53:21 PM new
"has never worked."
Here's from a CNN article of one of the successful tests:
"A target missile equipped with a mock warhead was launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California late Saturday. Twenty minutes later, the interceptor missile was launched from an island in the Pacific 4,800 miles away. At 11:09 p.m. ET, the two collided in an explosion 150 miles above the ocean."
So much for your theory. That was the #2 test success. Mind you, like I said missle defense was used somehwhat successfully in the Gulf war.
The reason the lazy liberals don't post more information from the scientists is because the scientists are still testing it and won't know now the success rate in 2004, and we know a 100% success rate is not necessarily the goal. So it is all irrelevant. The important thing is the studies went from a zero success rate to a 60%, and a 30-70% success during the Gulf war, depending on conditions.
Can we settle on 50% success rate in 2004, and 70% in 2010, and 100% in 2020? Yes, of course we can. That is progress.
posted on December 18, 2002 07:12:32 PM new
The Patriot was a prototype THEATRE defense weapon designed for short range defense of military positions. In other words if the intercept destroyed a scud and it missed the airbase but the warhead fell into the city nearby, it performed as intended. At the time it was used mainly for public relations. The success rate is depending on how you define it. Most of the scuds disintegrated and the Patriots detonated near pieces of the debris. The Patriot still exists in improved form, but a more advanced version (Arrow) is deployed in Israel for CITY defense which provides for interception much higher in the atmosphere.
This thread is like most here. Borillar or whoever gives us his:
legal
military
financial
medical
"theory" and backs it up with "proof" from editorials from the Guardian, Al Jezeera, The Bangladesh times, or the Acupuncture Gazette, because the AMA, Harvard Law School, CNN, etc are all tools to oppress the people.
Quickdraw is correct in that I have NEVER seen Borillar post a single "fact" that I'm aware of.
If Borillar comes to the conclusion that "George Bush and da Republicans" has violated the law, I'm sorry, I'll stick with the Supreme Court. If I want to know the method to best deal with the Iraqis militarily and estimate the number of casualties, I'll ask Tommy Franks. If I want to know the efficacy of a certain antibiotic, I'll check with Merck. Now, I might change my opinion if just one, JUST ONE, of the "predictions" made by many of the people that live on these boards EVER comes true.
The M1 tank was a farce, Apache helicopters couldn't get out of their own way, it's impossible to make a fighter stealthy.
posted on December 18, 2002 07:55:39 PM new
The missle system has to undergo an incremental improvement like every other weapon system that has every been developed. Look at a modern assault rifle compared to a musket.
It has to be USED to improve. Fortunatly North Korea and a few other large associations of people that won't fit in a padded cell seem willing to help test the systems.
I'm sure there will be a few failures. Look at the give and take that helped perfect our earlier wepons systems. When the US entered WWII they had no idea how bad their airplanes were but Japan provided lots of data and testing with the Mitsubishi Zero and in a matter of months they had progressed to the P-38 Lightning with the incentive provided.
Most of the improvements will be at the cost of West coast cities as Korean missiles will reach there first. So a simple move to the midwest or East coast is in order if you don't personally want to participate.
posted on December 18, 2002 08:19:48 PM new
DeSquirrel, you are welcome to voice your views concerning any issue on here - that's what we're here for and that's what the RT was designed to be for.
However, when you accuse me of certain things, I expect you to back that up. You aren't addressing a public figure, you're making unsubstanciated accusations against another member of Auction Watch. Therefore, provide proof that I've ever submitted any article from the following that you listed:
>editorials from the Guardian, Al Jezeera, The Bangladesh times, or the Acupuncture Gazette
Furthermore, you directly accused me of maligning mainstream media with:
>the AMA, Harvard Law School, CNN, etc are all tools to oppress the people.
Show one time - one time at all that I have ever made any statement like that.
8.6. Breach. You will breach this Agreement if you: a) Harass, threaten, or intimidate another member or AuctionWatch staff. During debate or disagreement, always address the issue at hand, not the individual.
Either privide proofs of what you accuse me of or:
9.1. Termination at AuctionWatch Discretion. In our discretion, we may immediately issue a warning, temporarily suspend, or terminate your registration, and delete Your Information if you breach any provision of this Agreement. This section does not limit any other remedies that may be available to AuctionWatch.
If you can not provide the proofs of these things, then I will complain in writing to Auction Watch that you are libeling me. Don't think that I won't either.
posted on December 18, 2002 09:07:10 PM new
Well Borillar be sure and put my name right next to DeSquirrel's when you go tattle to mommy because that's exactly how I see your posts too. Grow up. You can sure hand it out to others, but you could at least be MAN enough to take it. What a wimp!!! What a sorry excuse for a man you are.
posted on December 18, 2002 09:17:55 PM new
No, The wimp is DeSquirrel. He very carefully hid behind the two words "or whoever" while focusing his attack against Borillar.
posted on December 18, 2002 09:23:36 PM new
Don't you just get real tired of threatening everyone with the A/W breach of contract?
Anyone doesnt agree with you,and you have to quote the agreement we all had to sign and put up a credit card for.You accuse everyone else of "crying" and you are the one that does it the loudest.So far none of the agreement has been broken,and its a far stretch of your personal ego,that sees it any other way.Shame,Shame,Shame on you.
posted on December 19, 2002 12:48:50 AM new
BTW: when I first saw this heading, I thought it was gonna be a discussion of MickeyD's first ever quarterly LOSS!!
posted on December 19, 2002 03:40:32 AM new
Helen
Borillar "and others" is hiding?????
Sheesh.
Borillar,
Oh, gee, Oh my gosh, did I accuse you of maligning mainstream media????? I'm sorry it must be someone else that is a Johnny One-note in dozens of posts about the evil, conservatively controlled media empires working hand in hand with the government to suppress information. I'm sorry, we are lucky to have your dilegence in scouring the internet for the true word.
I sorry about that reference to the Acupucture Gazette. I'll go back and check on that. You still working on that list of mainstream Christian leaders advocating violence against Muslims??? I tried to help out, but I can't find any such statements by even small fry fundamentalist leaders.
Such quaint and wacky statements have now prompted Quickdraw to become one of the members of that large (and growing) fraternity of people who have rolled their eyes and asked for the basis of such rationalizations. You're reply was typical. No support for the position and a condescending remark about "educating people". Granted the first part is difficult to come by and the second is impossible.
Now, in our current thread, you support mlecher in the hypothesis that antimissiles won't work. That tests were "rigged" and that it was so "George Bush and the Republicans" could push money to his evil corporate contractors. (Psst.... antimissles predate George by decades). Now Quickdraw asks you to back that up because he, like I, can provide scientific analysis and tests of antimissile systems that support his position by the hundreds. (Aegis was developed and tested a few miles from here).
Ah but alas, all we are given is an "everybody knows" and a seat in an indeterminate classroom to await the professor. We'll need a bigger lecture hall soon.
posted on December 19, 2002 03:56:40 AM new
OTOH: isn't it about time that some tink-tank did a scientific study concerning the origins of DORKY GOP NAMES such as Newt & Trent and the frightfully-Fruedian Orin Hatch?
I mean like where the hell do you bozos come up with these monikers? Is there like a central-casting company specializing in OleMissMaleCheerleadersWhoFoughtTooth&NailToKeepBlacksOutOfTheirFrats with goofy names?
posted on December 19, 2002 08:28:10 AM new
Borillar, considering you name call and insult more times than anyone else on AW, you should not go around pointing fingers. We're onto your tactics, demoralize, dehumanize your opponent, typical liberal tactics. "You have never shown a willingness to rationally discuss any issue. You have on every occasion avoided answering any question or statement of fact that disagrees with your position. You want to hang onto your position and no matter what anyone has to say and no matter what facts come about, you refuse to discuss it and ignore it. Your actions are childish and pointless to discuss anything with you. You can stuff that into your oblique."
Should I report you for violating AW terms and for posting false accusations against me?
