Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)
 

cali

(114,904 posts)
Sun Sep 15, 2013, 08:42 AM Sep 2013

Fucking Ridiculous ANYWHERE: Really? A Missile-Base in Vermont [View all]

I hate the fucking Pentagon.

This week, the Vermont news media published stories stating that the Pentagon is considering building a Ground-based Midcourse Defense base in Jericho, Vermont, a small town near Burlington and Montpelier. When people think about Vermont, Jericho is what people think of; wooded lands, dairy farms, older houses and a blend of Yankee families whose roots go back generations and newer residents looking for tranquility, beauty and a good place to raise their kids. There is no reasonable argument for a missile base in Jericho, Vermont. Indeed, there is no reasonable argument for this missile base to be built anywhere.

It was barely twenty years ago that the United States shut down most of its silos containing missiles because their reason for being no longer existed. Even if someone believes that terrorists or another country will mount a major attack on the United States, the likelihood of this type of missile defense having any use is near zero. There is one big reason for this proposed site. That reason is profit for the corporations involved. The construction of this site is nothing more than a transfer of public monies to private corporations. It is very similar to what sports team owners do when they convince a city to build a new stadium except that missile sites are obviously quite lethal and with no redeeming social or entertainment value.

If one takes a look at the components of the system the Pentagon wants to place in Vermont, they will see that, besides the grotesque nature of the language describing certain parts of the system, the companies that will profit from its construction are quite familiar. Here are the basics:

Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle (EKV) — Raytheon
Ground Based Interceptor (GBI) — Orbital Sciences
Battle Management Command, Control and Communications (BMC3) — Northrop Grumman
Ground Based Radars (GBR) — Raytheon
Upgraded Early Warning Radars (UEWR) (aka PAVE PAWS) — Raytheon
Forward Based X-Band Radars (FBXB) –Raytheon

<snip>

http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/09/13/a-missile-base-in-vermont/

<snip>

"It's wasted money," said Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont. "It's not going to make us any more secure whether it's in Vermont or anywhere else."

Leahy says the missiles are the wrong choice for Vermont and the country. He says the U.S. has spent more than $158 billion on the program since the Reagan administration and would rather see dollars spent on issues like veteran health care.

"In the real world, I defy you to find anybody who says this will work and say it unequivocally," Leahy said.

<snip>

http://www.wcax.com/story/23419039/pentagon-eyes-vermont-for-missile-defense-system

69 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
and people think... Takket Sep 2013 #1
Pretty obvious, isn't, to anyone with more than half a brain. pangaia Sep 2013 #22
Are you saying that the US does not need any missiles anymore? (nt) Nye Bevan Sep 2013 #2
I'm saying we don't need more missiles. cali Sep 2013 #3
The US doesn't need sulphurdunn Sep 2013 #7
Well, that's not entirely true Stargazer09 Sep 2013 #31
We already possess sulphurdunn Sep 2013 #38
Other countries are building their arsenals to defend against us,US. RC Sep 2013 #44
"Other countries are building their arsenals to defend against us,US." NCTraveler Sep 2013 #63
You do not get out much, do you? RC Sep 2013 #65
Get out often thank you. NCTraveler Sep 2013 #66
It depends on whether they have something we want. RC Sep 2013 #67
I am aware of all of that. NCTraveler Sep 2013 #68
No change from the original claim. It all fits together. RC Sep 2013 #69
I believe we have enough missiles already. dballance Sep 2013 #26
Missile bases aren't anything new in VT. On my way to St Albans... Cooley Hurd Sep 2013 #4
Unfortunately, Sen. Leahy is a big supporter of buying and basing F-35s in Burlington. n/t unhappycamper Sep 2013 #5
Nobody's going to shoot at us with an ICBM. rrneck Sep 2013 #6
I wouldn't be so certain Stargazer09 Sep 2013 #32
MAD worked in the twentieth century, it will work now. rrneck Sep 2013 #37
I don't think MAD comes into play wercal Sep 2013 #52
The logic is the same. rrneck Sep 2013 #54
I just don't see us nuking North Korea wercal Sep 2013 #55
When they knocked down the WTC the jingoism was palpaple rrneck Sep 2013 #56
I have no doubt a North Korean attack would lead us to bombing them wercal Sep 2013 #57
North Korea is not an extential threat, rrneck Sep 2013 #58
Well we disagree wercal Sep 2013 #59
It's okay to disagree. rrneck Sep 2013 #62
But the filthy rich must get filthier. It's the most important thing in the world. nt valerief Sep 2013 #8
Where should they be? treestar Sep 2013 #9
In a grave unhappycamper Sep 2013 #12
I can't speak for cali... ljm2002 Sep 2013 #13
Do you really think we can do without missile defense? treestar Sep 2013 #45
Your question was a non sequitur... ljm2002 Sep 2013 #46
Well then if the issue is where, why not Vermont? treestar Sep 2013 #47
Are you really that dense? ljm2002 Sep 2013 #48
Pick which it is treestar Sep 2013 #49
Up Raytheon's ass? L0oniX Sep 2013 #21
they shouldn't be anywhere. cali Sep 2013 #60
that's absurd. We have to have missile defense treestar Sep 2013 #61
military mtasselin Sep 2013 #10
Well, given the type of missiles you mentioned, MineralMan Sep 2013 #11
Put the Interceptors next to the Alberta Tar Sands. n/t formercia Sep 2013 #15
Well, that's in Canada, not the USA. MineralMan Sep 2013 #16
Sure it will. Why not? :>) pangaia Sep 2013 #27
Agreed Stargazer09 Sep 2013 #33
Well, I think the ICBM threat is steadily diminishing, MineralMan Sep 2013 #35
I live in Maine and wonder why our State wasn't chosen. formercia Sep 2013 #14
True. Maine would be even more appropriate. MineralMan Sep 2013 #18
I agree. Maine is much more of a threat ....to Canada. L0oniX Sep 2013 #20
There is some question about whether Canada actually exists. MineralMan Sep 2013 #23
Canada does in fact exist. pangaia Sep 2013 #39
Maine is being considered. Clown is Down Sep 2013 #24
Ah, OK. I guess this is still in the early planning stages. MineralMan Sep 2013 #25
according to the story... Clown is Down Sep 2013 #34
Thanks. I'll go have a look. MineralMan Sep 2013 #36
Because of the maple syrup, I expect. pangaia Sep 2013 #28
Here in Minnesota, the maple syrup industry would MineralMan Sep 2013 #30
Sorry you had such a bad year. pangaia Sep 2013 #40
It has to be built . . . another_liberal Sep 2013 #17
I agree, 100%. pangaia Sep 2013 #29
Breaking: Canada threatens to counter US agression with nuke missile base in Nova Scotia. L0oniX Sep 2013 #19
The attraction is people see this and think JOBS! Clown is Down Sep 2013 #41
Same shit, different decade... Thor_MN Sep 2013 #42
There's an old Nike missile base down the road from me NickB79 Sep 2013 #43
Why Vermont? TomClash Sep 2013 #50
No kidding gopiscrap Sep 2013 #51
Military Base Old Troop Sep 2013 #53
I don't know..."Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle" is pretty badazz. Good name for a band! didact Sep 2013 #64
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Fucking Ridiculous ANYWHE...