Still, it doesn't seem likely that either the North Korean or Iranian regimes will be swayed by these policies. Such concessions as have been extracted from Mr. Kim in the past have followed tough steps by the United States and China, above all the squeezing of the regime's foreign bank accounts. It's hard to believe that the Obama administration will make more progress than its predecessors without more consistency in administering that kind of medicine.Don't look now, but just as the Pentagon wants to cut back on missile defense and Obama is talking about only using missile defense that has been successfully tested, the Israelis just had a successful test of their Arrow II defense system.
Israel carried out a test launch of its Arrow II interceptor missile on Tuesday, the Defense Ministry said, a system designed to defend against possible ballistic missile attacks by Iran and Syria.Jim Geraghty notes unintended consequences from the Obama economic plans.
"It was a successful test," the ministry said, adding that 90 percent of test launches – 16 in all, according to Israel Radio – have been successful.
Scott Wilson, the former Washington Post correspondent in Colombia, has some intriguing comments on what we could learn from President Uribe's struggle against terrorist guerrillas to apply to our efforts in Afghanistan.
3 comments:
Betsy,
"...but just as the Pentagon wants to cut back on missile defense...."
I'd like to know who is speaking for the Pentagon with the idea of reducing our ability to defend against ballistic missiles. Whether this is a question of defending the continent against ICBMs or protecting troops deployed abroad, the means are available and the need is there. I want to hear the explanation as to why the programs should not go forward AND I want to hear from the crowd that whined when it found out that the Army and USMC was using unarmored wheeled vehicles in Iraq! Remember the cries of condemnation when Rumsfeld announced that you go to war with the forces you have? I don't recall anyone predicting a need for uparmored (or armored period) wheeled vehicles across the board in the 1990s but we've seen a threat emerging from North Korea and Iran for decades and we've still found a way to excuse ourselves from taking proper defensive measures.
So we'll rise up in anger that every soldier does not have armored transportation but we won't do a damn thing about providing them with a defensive umbrella against attack by theater ballistic missiles? WTF?!
We need to stop all American taxpayer payments to Israel. The amount is in the billions of dollars.
What do Americans get for that? That money is better spent at home.
Jaw Bone,
Why do you want Israelis to die? Why do you want Israel to be destroyed? Do you think Israel should exist at all?
By the way, much of the money that goes to Israel is tied in with money that goes to Egypt. It's that peace thing Carter put together back when he kind of went along with the idea of an Israel. Are you mad at him too?
Wouldn't it be a shame if Israel's continued foray into ABM defenses allows it to defend itself against an attack that would provoke a massive war and huge loss of life? Why does this bother you?
But if you insist on bringing that money home, I'd hope you'd let us have some of it for school vouchers!
Post a Comment