NationStates Jolt Archive

Poodle to the USA?

K-US in talks on missile defence
US missile test in 2000
The US has had mixed results from its missile tests
The UK and US have held high level talks on the possibility of putting a "Son of Star Wars" anti-ballistic missile defence system on British soil.

An article in The Economist claims Prime Minister Tony Blair has lobbied President George Bush for the system.

But government sources have told the BBC that talks are "to keep Britain's options open", not a lobbying effort.

The US said it is still more likely to site a missile defence system in eastern Europe than in the UK.

Russia has said the system, which tracks and destroys missiles launched at the US, will trigger an arms race.

Poland and the Czech Republic have both been approached by America about locating part of the hugely expensive system on their soil.

A spokesman at the American embassy in London said there may be opportunities to talk about other needs but it was looking at the Czech Republic or Poland as the primary sites.

Secret talks

BBC defence correspondent Paul Wood said he had confirmed "secret high-level negotiations" had been taking place.

Talks were continuing between the National Security Council and Britain's top foreign affairs adviser Sir Nigel Sheinwald, he said.

But Downing Street has said talks are at a very early stage, and were intended only to keep Britain in consideration as plans were developed.


Missile defence graphic

How defence system works
Q&A: Son of Star Wars

David Rennie, from the Economist, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme his understanding was that Mr Blair had "personally led" efforts for silos to be based in the UK, believing it would make Britain safer.

The system uses radar and satellites to detect enemy missile launches and to guide interceptors to their targets.

Shadow defence secretary Liam Fox said the Conservatives would not oppose locating part of the system in the UK, but wanted to examine it in detail.

'Get honest'

"We have had no details at all from the government despite asking a lot of questions in Parliament.

"If the government really do want to maintain what they regard as a bipartisan approach to defence in this country, they better start getting honest with the opposition," said Mr Fox.

Poland has recently confirmed the US wants to use its territory to build part of its missile defence base.


Even if it did work, it would be tackling the wrong problem at the wrong time
Paul Ingram
British American Security Information Council

The US has also asked permission from the Czech Republic and received the backing of Czech Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek.

In 2002, the US withdrew from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty it signed with the Soviet Union.

It says a missile defence system could significantly reduce threats from so-called "rogue states" such as Iran and North Korea.


HAVE YOUR SAY
Missile defence systems like these are already obsolete and incapable of intercepting modern missiles
Tom, Reading

Send us your comments

But Paul Ingram, of the British American Security Information Council, said the success of the system was "a long way from being proven".

"Even if it did work, it would be tackling the wrong problem at the wrong time," he told the BBC.

"The proliferation of ballistic missile technology is not as racing away as we are being led to believe. It has no relevance at all when it comes to issues like the war on terror."

Meanwhile, US defence officials say work on one part of the missile defence programme based at RAF Fylingdales in North Yorkshire - an early warning radar system upgrade - is almost complete.

The government faced opposition in 2003 when it agreed the work could go ahead.

Is it not about time that the people that run the UK realise that our "special relationship" is only worthwhile for the USA and fooks te UK at every step?

So could we please make this the first step to indepdence and say not to this stupid idea.

/rant ;)

Agreed. We just seem to be following the US like a little lapdog. There was time the UK could've been considered strong and could hold its own. Now we seem to be dependant on the USA for a lot of things.

The U.K should say no to this. The other place specified for the system was Poland - they have enough space, hell, almost their whole population seems to be in Lancaster or driving HGVs badly on the M6 ad M65.

Why?

Star Wars would also protect Britain from any missiles that may be heading towards us. And in addition, the bases stationed here will need caterers, cleaners, plumbers, mechanics, etc. All jobs that will be filled by British people.

It will cost us nothing but our "national pride" (if you let something that silly get to you in the first place), and offers us security, improved relations with the American people and more jobs.

To oppose this is nothing but silly, ill-thought-out anti-Americanism.

well wouldn't we benifit from the system? We might as well let the US front the Billions it would cost, it only takes a small amount of land.

However I don't like to think that the UK is at the beck and call of the US.

Uh, it seems that the article is saying that the Uk is asking the US to put the missil defense system there, while the US wants to put it in Eastern Europe. So how would saying no to the defense system saying no to the US? Or am I reading something wrong?

Wouldn't it also increase the target status of the UK? I mean, if you're going to attack someone with ballistic missiles one of the first logical steps would be to destroy as much of the enemy's missiles and missile defence systems as possible before they can hit you back. So the UK having US missiles and missile defence is potentially like painting a large target on the country.

Also, with Blair in number 10 there's no way there'll be any opposition. You could get millions on the streets against it and he still wouldn't notice, his head is just wedged too far up Bush's backside for him to be able to hear anything any more.

Why?

Star Wars would also protect Britain from any missiles that may be heading towards us. And in addition, the bases stationed here will need caterers, cleaners, plumbers, mechanics, etc. All jobs that will be filled by British people.

It will cost us nothing but our "national pride" (if you let something that silly get to you in the first place), and offers us security, improved relations with the American people and more jobs.

To oppose this is nothing but silly, ill-thought-out anti-Americanism.

See i was going to let this go right up until the last line so I'll meet your ideas head on.

First off those missiles heading towards us, where are they comming from? Who would be the agressor. This program is dividing the world in a war we cannot fathom and certainly as it progresses this will get worse as coutries like Russia and China see it as a real threat.

A decision to hold such a base will clearly put us on one side or the other in a world scenario that needs as fewer sides as possible. The ramifications of agreeing to this are huge.

So yes we could get then to occupy some more land however just so you know, on most american basis the jobs you cited are done by Americans. Literally American airbases in the UK and like little US towns with everything they need. The economic benifits would be small.

So to paraphrase yourself not opposing this is nothing but silly, ill-thought-out anti-intelligence. :D

As an USAian I don't understand why the British followed us into Bushnam much less anywhere else.

So just do like the French and just say no. Of course, we'll have to get used to calling English Muffins, Freedom Muffins.

Uh, it seems that the article is saying that the Uk is asking the US to put the missil defense system there, while the US wants to put it in Eastern Europe. So how would saying no to the defense system saying no to the US?

Follow past UK policy. We voluenter ourselves for all sorts of shit US jobs.

"whats that you need some sort of token International backing in the UN for a war in Iraq, oh yeah we will sign up for that" ;)

PS Poland said no so year it's comming our way.

Wouldn't it also increase the target status of the UK?

Unlikely, if anyone was throwing nukes around then they would best off going for the US and anyone else who is allied with them and that has nukes (Like us :) and france etc). So having the defence system isn't too bad.

See i was going to let this go right up until the last line so I'll meet your ideas head on.

First off those missiles heading towards us, where are they comming from? Who would be the agressor. This program is dividing the world in a war we cannot fathom and certainly as it progresses this will get worse as coutries like Russia and China see it as a real threat.

A decision to hold such a base will clearly put us on one side or the other in a world scenario that needs as fewer sides as possible. The ramifications of agreeing to this are huge.

So yes we could get then to occupy some more land however just so you know, on most american basis the jobs you cited are done by Americans. Literally American airbases in the UK and like little US towns with everything they need. The economic benifits would be small.

So to paraphrase yourself not opposing this is nothing but silly, ill-thought-out anti-intelligence. :DYes, but the fact that you are ignoring the fact that the article says the US is considering puting them in Eastern Europe and Blair is asking that they be put in Britain, and acting as if the US is telling Britain to let them put them there does seem a tad blindly anti-american.

Follow past UK policy. We voluenter ourselves for all sorts of shit US jobs.

"whats that you need some sort of token International backing in the UN for a war in Iraq, oh yeah we will sign up for that" ;)

PS Poland said no so year it's comming our way.
Still it isn't the US telling Britain what to do.

Wouldn't it make more sense for the US to say no?

US: So, Eastern Europe. You want missiles?
UK: WE don't want missiles.
US: YOU'RE Eastern Europe?

See i was going to let this go right up until the last line so I'll meet your ideas head on.

First off those missiles heading towards us, where are they comming from? Who would be the agressor. This program is dividing the world in a war we cannot fathom and certainly as it progresses this will get worse as coutries like Russia and China see it as a real threat.

A decision to hold such a base will clearly put us on one side or the other in a world scenario that needs as fewer sides as possible. The ramifications of agreeing to this are huge.

So yes we could get then to occupy some more land however just so you know, on most american basis the jobs you cited are done by Americans. Literally American airbases in the UK and like little US towns with everything they need. The economic benifits would be small.

So to paraphrase yourself not opposing this is nothing but silly, ill-thought-out anti-intelligence. :D

There is no danger of nuclear annihilation today, no. But look how quickly the world changed from 1989 to 1991. If change that rapid occured again, we would be screwed without a worthwhile nuclear deterrent. And Granthor, there isn't much danger of their being any tactical strikes against UK-based anti-missile facilities - if you are going to get yourself into a nuclear war, the only logical move is to hit first, hit fast, and hit hard. Pussyfooting around by denting your opponents ability to hit back will only increase how much damage they can inflict of you.

News flash: we are on the USA's side. You can lie to yourself about that as much as you like, but ultimately, London and Washington are very close, and more importantly, any potential nuclear enemy will view London and Washington as being very close. So we're damned if we do, and damned if we don't.

I hardly doubt the US is going to import its window cleaners... Foreign bases are quite beneficial to local economies, especially when based in very stable, allied nations. US soldiers in Britain spend a lot on 'R&R'.

And no, that is hardly an effective paraphrasing. Hosting the anti-missile system would have many benefits (thus why we are asking to host it!), and will do no harm (apart from the imagined harm of 'z0mg, teh Amerikans are invading Mother Britannia!!1')

maybe we should hore ourselves out to Russia to make America jealous of what there missing

Plus we could use the rent boys (http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30200-1251879,00.html)

Would the system protect the UK against nuclear attack or would it only intercept missiles bound for the US.

Would the system protect the UK against nuclear attack or would it only intercept missiles bound for the US?