Comments on: One, Two, Three, Let’s All Say It Together…. http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/07/one-two-three-lets-all-say-it-together/ Firedoglake weblog Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:25:27 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: mui1 http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/07/one-two-three-lets-all-say-it-together/#comment-1875856 mui1 Wed, 08 Apr 2009 16:35:07 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/07/one-two-three-lets-all-say-it-together/#comment-1875856 <p><a href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/Rest-of-World/N-Koreas-satellite-launch-not-same-as-missile-test-China/articleshow/4370584.cms" rel="nofollow">Satellite or missile</a></p> Satellite or missile

]]> By: mui1 http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/07/one-two-three-lets-all-say-it-together/#comment-1875854 mui1 Wed, 08 Apr 2009 16:30:43 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/07/one-two-three-lets-all-say-it-together/#comment-1875854 <blockquote><p>Interestingly, at the same time, the propensity of the scarey North Korean ballistic missiles to break up in mid-flight like the SCUDs</p></blockquote> <p>Weren’t they launching a satellite that went off like a missile on a limp dick?</p>

Interestingly, at the same time, the propensity of the scarey North Korean ballistic missiles to break up in mid-flight like the SCUDs

Weren’t they launching a satellite that went off like a missile on a limp dick?

]]> By: mui1 http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/07/one-two-three-lets-all-say-it-together/#comment-1875853 mui1 Wed, 08 Apr 2009 16:29:02 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/07/one-two-three-lets-all-say-it-together/#comment-1875853 <p>I wonder if Joe’s more concerned about kickbacks or does he really have this bullshit right-wing war on terra view of the world?<br /> . maybe Holy Joe is reading the economist. I have this March issue, “How China sees the World.” I wonder how many wonks read these articles in *gee whiz* fashion. If so, it’s a wonder that they even see the Chinese as human beings and not some people on a mission to mars. And it’s no wonder Greg Staph kept pushing at Rice on Sundayre:N.Korea, saying, but but but “isn’t pushing china the answer? Shouldn’t we be focusing on pushing China?” Like yes, rightards, China is big. No rightards, Asia is a complex place. It’s a place where China has gotten it’s ass beat by fierce little countries like Vietnam. And Japan can flap right-wing style. G*ds! I am so fed up every time a George Will, Greg Steph brings up China. Why don’t they *read* something? anything! besides the so-called “conventional wisdom” ?!?<br /> Their articles on Iran seem all riddled with bullet headed logic and scarcely veiled rightard hegemonic concerns.</p> I wonder if Joe’s more concerned about kickbacks or does he really have this bullshit right-wing war on terra view of the world?
. maybe Holy Joe is reading the economist. I have this March issue, “How China sees the World.” I wonder how many wonks read these articles in *gee whiz* fashion. If so, it’s a wonder that they even see the Chinese as human beings and not some people on a mission to mars. And it’s no wonder Greg Staph kept pushing at Rice on Sundayre:N.Korea, saying, but but but “isn’t pushing china the answer? Shouldn’t we be focusing on pushing China?” Like yes, rightards, China is big. No rightards, Asia is a complex place. It’s a place where China has gotten it’s ass beat by fierce little countries like Vietnam. And Japan can flap right-wing style. G*ds! I am so fed up every time a George Will, Greg Steph brings up China. Why don’t they *read* something? anything! besides the so-called “conventional wisdom” ?!?
Their articles on Iran seem all riddled with bullet headed logic and scarcely veiled rightard hegemonic concerns.

]]> By: robspierre http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/07/one-two-three-lets-all-say-it-together/#comment-1875852 robspierre Wed, 08 Apr 2009 16:18:18 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/07/one-two-three-lets-all-say-it-together/#comment-1875852 <p>I find it interesting that little of the discussion seems to consider the implications of the fact that the missile defense system does not work and the threat–third-world ballistic missiles–does not work much better. Lieberman is saying that we are in danger if we do not waste money on a weapon that can’t defend us from a weapon that can’t attack us.</p> <p>I’ve followed the subject fairly closely over the 30-odd years that missile defense has been a topic, and I am unaware of a single, indisputably successful test intercept of a ballistic missile under anything like realistic conditions. When you get a trade publication and read the fine print, the “technically” and “partially” successful intercepts announced in the mainstream media all turn out to have been near misses against unrealisticly large targets and targets that carried beacons to help the interceptor lock on. Similarly, during the first Gulf War, we heard a lot of noise about the success of the Patriot missile against Iraqi SCUDs. The post-action analysis, which showed not so much as a near miss, got almost no mainline press at all, and we bought lots more Patriots at ridiculously high cost. Now Aegis destroyers and the son-of-Star-Wars system in Alaska are getting the same treatment. Israel just announced the success of its Arrow-II, after years of failures.</p> <p>Interestingly, at the same time, the propensity of the scarey North Korean ballistic missiles to break up in mid-flight like the SCUDs before them also goes largely unmentioned. The Iranians buy this technology. Iranian missiles probably have the same problems–it’s a simple technology in theory but hard to engineer in practice. So the threat missiles are, in all likelihood, self-intercepting. </p> <p>Which leaves us with questions about Lieberman’s motives. Dare one suggest that he and the Iranian extremists share a common goal, like Reagan and the ayatollahs of old? Might we conclude that, by agreeing to wield a non-existent defense against a non-existent threat, Lieberman and his counterparts in Teheran and Jerusalem are deliberately escalating international tensions and courting hysteria for domestic political reasons?</p> I find it interesting that little of the discussion seems to consider the implications of the fact that the missile defense system does not work and the threat–third-world ballistic missiles–does not work much better. Lieberman is saying that we are in danger if we do not waste money on a weapon that can’t defend us from a weapon that can’t attack us.

I’ve followed the subject fairly closely over the 30-odd years that missile defense has been a topic, and I am unaware of a single, indisputably successful test intercept of a ballistic missile under anything like realistic conditions. When you get a trade publication and read the fine print, the “technically” and “partially” successful intercepts announced in the mainstream media all turn out to have been near misses against unrealisticly large targets and targets that carried beacons to help the interceptor lock on. Similarly, during the first Gulf War, we heard a lot of noise about the success of the Patriot missile against Iraqi SCUDs. The post-action analysis, which showed not so much as a near miss, got almost no mainline press at all, and we bought lots more Patriots at ridiculously high cost. Now Aegis destroyers and the son-of-Star-Wars system in Alaska are getting the same treatment. Israel just announced the success of its Arrow-II, after years of failures.

Interestingly, at the same time, the propensity of the scarey North Korean ballistic missiles to break up in mid-flight like the SCUDs before them also goes largely unmentioned. The Iranians buy this technology. Iranian missiles probably have the same problems–it’s a simple technology in theory but hard to engineer in practice. So the threat missiles are, in all likelihood, self-intercepting.

Which leaves us with questions about Lieberman’s motives. Dare one suggest that he and the Iranian extremists share a common goal, like Reagan and the ayatollahs of old? Might we conclude that, by agreeing to wield a non-existent defense against a non-existent threat, Lieberman and his counterparts in Teheran and Jerusalem are deliberately escalating international tensions and courting hysteria for domestic political reasons?

]]> By: Lish http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/07/one-two-three-lets-all-say-it-together/#comment-1875764 Lish Wed, 08 Apr 2009 07:25:28 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/07/one-two-three-lets-all-say-it-together/#comment-1875764 <p>bobschacht wrote:</p> <blockquote><p>When will Rahm have a little heart to heart chat with Joe-boy?</p></blockquote> <p>You must be joking. Emanuel and Lieberman have intimate little chats every day about <strong>how much they both heart USrael</strong>.</p> bobschacht wrote:

When will Rahm have a little heart to heart chat with Joe-boy?

You must be joking. Emanuel and Lieberman have intimate little chats every day about how much they both heart USrael.

]]> By: igo2go http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/07/one-two-three-lets-all-say-it-together/#comment-1875526 igo2go Wed, 08 Apr 2009 05:08:29 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/07/one-two-three-lets-all-say-it-together/#comment-1875526 <p>“Ti-i-i-i-me ain’t on his side…” ohh I pray “Cause he keeps comin back…” Ain’t it time to put him out to easier going pastures. Maybe create a Dept of Crapola, go well with his Chairmanship of the Dept of Same Old Crapola.</p> “Ti-i-i-i-me ain’t on his side…” ohh I pray “Cause he keeps comin back…” Ain’t it time to put him out to easier going pastures. Maybe create a Dept of Crapola, go well with his Chairmanship of the Dept of Same Old Crapola.

]]> By: TheObnox http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/07/one-two-three-lets-all-say-it-together/#comment-1875511 TheObnox Wed, 08 Apr 2009 03:13:26 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/07/one-two-three-lets-all-say-it-together/#comment-1875511 <p>That pretty well sums it up for me, too.</p> That pretty well sums it up for me, too.

]]> By: RevDeb http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/07/one-two-three-lets-all-say-it-together/#comment-1875504 RevDeb Wed, 08 Apr 2009 02:50:37 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/07/one-two-three-lets-all-say-it-together/#comment-1875504 <p>Doesn’t surprise me at all.</p> <p>What leads any of us to believe that this wasn’t part of the plan all along?</p> <p>And if it wasn’t part of Obama’s plan, then, frankly, he got what he deserved. He kind of asked for it.</p> <p>I’m not shocked at anything any more.</p> Doesn’t surprise me at all.

What leads any of us to believe that this wasn’t part of the plan all along?

And if it wasn’t part of Obama’s plan, then, frankly, he got what he deserved. He kind of asked for it.

I’m not shocked at anything any more.

]]> By: bobschacht http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/07/one-two-three-lets-all-say-it-together/#comment-1875497 bobschacht Wed, 08 Apr 2009 02:45:03 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/07/one-two-three-lets-all-say-it-together/#comment-1875497 <p>So this is the thanks Obama gets for supporting Lieberman’s continuation as chair? </p> <p>When will Rahm have a little heart to heart chat with Joe-boy?</p> <p>Bob in HI</p> So this is the thanks Obama gets for supporting Lieberman’s continuation as chair?

When will Rahm have a little heart to heart chat with Joe-boy?

Bob in HI

]]> By: Henk http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/07/one-two-three-lets-all-say-it-together/#comment-1875496 Henk Wed, 08 Apr 2009 02:44:10 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/07/one-two-three-lets-all-say-it-together/#comment-1875496 <p>Its still a good old boys club and Harry Reid identifies much more closely with Joe Leiberman than he does with you and I. If he made any noise condemning Holy Joe’s actions during the electing, it was just for show.</p> Its still a good old boys club and Harry Reid identifies much more closely with Joe Leiberman than he does with you and I. If he made any noise condemning Holy Joe’s actions during the electing, it was just for show.

]]>