View Single Post
Old 09-06-2007, 10:53   #7
simon simon is offline
Участник
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: England
Posts: 401

Quote:
Originally Posted by PowerPuff Grrl View Post
Sorry simon, while all that sounds credible there's a glaring omission as to why it has to be built in Europe. Iran's missiles do not threaten Europe do they?
More like oil interests in the Middle East and the obvious, Israel. If Bush was so concerned with Iran why wouldn't the US build defence systems in places Iran would target the most?
The radar and anti-missile bases need to be reasonably close to Iran, so as to be able to catch the missile in the boost phase, when it's most vulnerable. Bases in the US would be much too far away.

Iran announced in 2004 that it had developed missiles with a 2000 km range, capable of reaching south-eastern Europe. They are an upgrade of the Shahab-3, which already had the 1300 km range needed to strike anywhere in Israel. Why would Iran have done that and announced it if they weren't threatening Europe?

There are intelligence reports that Iran has acquired missiles with a 3000 km range from North Korea, which are capable of reaching most of Europe.

Iran recently tested a suborbital rocket, which seems to be a stepping stone to a satellite launcher - something that also could be used as an intercontinental missile capable of reaching anywhere in the world.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talyubittu View Post
The U.S. does not allow other countries to stick missiles in direct firing location of themselves, so Europe should not either. I honestly don't see much difference in the Cuban Missile Crisis vs. What the U.S. is trying to do now.
The enormous difference is that the Soviet missiles in Cuba were offensive nuclear missiles aimed at American cities. These will not be missiles aimed at Iran or Russia, they're defensive anti-missile missiles, intended to stop Iranian nuclear missiles fired at cities.

Quote:
I don't think the world will ever come to Nuclear War. I think it's just a big way to scare people into doing something. Any country who launches a nuclear weapon puts them self at high risk. The only reason Japan didn't during Hiroshima's bombing was because they didn't want to risk full scale war. I quite Hirohito.
That's incorrect. Japan didn't have nuclear weapons.

Last edited by simon; 09-06-2007 at 11:09.
  Reply With Quote