• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US willing to share Aegis missile tech with Russia - good idea?

Is sharing the Aegis (SM-3) missile systems with Russia a good idea?

  • Yes - it's fine

    Votes: 2 13.3%
  • No - it's crazy

    Votes: 13 86.7%
  • Other (explain)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    15
  • Poll closed .

Ockham

Noblesse oblige
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
23,909
Reaction score
11,003
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
President Obama has signaled he wants to share SM-3 missile defense systems with Russia. The SM-3, as I found out is the Navy's Aegis anti-ballistic missile which is a short to medium ranged defensive missile. Security members think this is a bad idea overall but worse if Russia shares said technology with China, North Korea and possibly Iran. There are also some questions as to the legality of sharing such systems with Russia. (See article below).

Inside the Ring - Washington Times


Some background on SM-3 missile systems.
RIM-161 Standard Missile 3 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Presumably, this is a "gift" to Russia to show the US is serious about missile talks with Russia which are currently stalled.

Good idea or not?
 
Military tech should never be shared with other countries.Nor should be we selling or giving military equipment to other countries.If history has taught us anything is that friends can become enemies really quick and we do not be basically arming our future enemies.
 
Last edited:
President Obama has signaled he wants to share SM-3 missile defense systems with Russia. The SM-3, as I found out is the Navy's Aegis anti-ballistic missile which is a short to medium ranged defensive missile. Security members think this is a bad idea overall but worse if Russia shares said technology with China, North Korea and possibly Iran. There are also some questions as to the legality of sharing such systems with Russia. (See article below).

Inside the Ring - Washington Times


Some background on SM-3 missile systems.
RIM-161 Standard Missile 3 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Presumably, this is a "gift" to Russia to show the US is serious about missile talks with Russia which are currently stalled.

Good idea or not?

Wasn't Aegis the crown jewel of the Navy at one point? We've already shared it with allies, but Russia? Man I dunno about this.

Edit: And is this just about the Standard Missile, or is it the Aegis Combat System as a whole, including radar tech and everything?
 
Last edited:
Wasn't Aegis the crown jewel of the Navy at one point? We've already shared it with allies, but Russia? Man I dunno about this.

Edit: And is this just about the Standard Missile, or is it the Aegis Combat System as a whole, including radar tech and everything?

SB - don't know the details about exactly what sub-systems or support systems will go along with the deal as it's being presented. I have a difficult time with just the missile itself... if, hypothetically, it did include the radar tech, tracking systems, etc... there's no way under any circumstances I would be for sending it to Russia.
 
SB - don't know the details about exactly what sub-systems or support systems will go along with the deal as it's being presented. I have a difficult time with just the missile itself... if, hypothetically, it did include the radar tech, tracking systems, etc... there's no way under any circumstances I would be for sending it to Russia.

My position is, if the Russians want something like this they should develop it themselves. There's no way we should be showing this amount of goodwill to the Russians while the Putinvedev dynasty is still in power.
 
I cant think of any situation where sharing military technology with another country, not to mention a country that not even half a century ago, was within a hairs breath of launching nuclear missles against us, is a good idea. I wouldnt even share that kind of tech with Canada, who has never lefted a finger against us.
 
I feel we should never voluntarily share military technology with anyone period, today's friend could be tomorrows enemy. Then again this is the US and we all know that noone ever turns on us.... :shock:
 
I cant think of any situation where sharing military technology with another country, not to mention a country that not even half a century ago, was within a hairs breath of launching nuclear missles against us, is a good idea. I wouldnt even share that kind of tech with Canada, who has never lefted a finger against us.

Well, to be frank we have shared a lot of technology with our allies, including nations like Korea, Japan, and the Brits.
 
What possible good could come from this? None. Nada. Zip.
 
Sure, yes. If sharing some anti-missile defense tech makes Russia more willing to give up more of it's nukes, that definitely makes us safer overall.
 
Sure, yes. If sharing some anti-missile defense tech makes Russia more willing to give up more of it's nukes, that definitely makes us safer overall.

Yeah, that worked really well the last time. We got a treaty where we gave up a bunch of nukes and they gave up nothing.
 
Yeah, that worked really well the last time. We got a treaty where we gave up a bunch of nukes and they gave up nothing.

Huh? They have reduced their nuclear arsenal from 55,000 to 2,000....
 
Sure, yes. If sharing some anti-missile defense tech makes Russia more willing to give up more of it's nukes, that definitely makes us safer overall.

SOME of its nukes??? At the height of the cold war russia had thousands of nuclear warheads. Even as late at 2007 they had over 3000! They could give up all but 100 of them and still be able to destroy every human on the planet! The idea that we would sacrifice cutting edge missile tech in exchange for the possibility that they might think about getting rid of a few nukes shows me just how kiss a$$ this presidency is.
 
Well, to be frank we have shared a lot of technology with our allies, including nations like Korea, Japan, and the Brits.

That is called a precedent, and it doesnt make it a good idea.
 
SOME of its nukes??? At the height of the cold war russia had thousands of nuclear warheads. Even as late at 2007 they had over 3000! They could give up all but 100 of them and still be able to destroy every human on the planet! The idea that we would sacrifice cutting edge missile tech in exchange for the possibility that they might think about getting rid of a few nukes shows me just how kiss a$$ this presidency is.

They have cut their arsenal from about 55,000 to about 2,000 due to various treaties with the US over the years. That's huge. Every nuke that is out there means more chance it will slip into the hands of terrorists or who knows what. Aegis is just a missile DEFENSE system, it's not an offensive weapon. What is your concern exactly? You worry that we will one day launch ICBMs at them and they'll have an easier time blocking it? Why would we do that?
 
Well, to be frank we have shared a lot of technology with our allies, including nations like Korea, Japan, and the Brits.

And one of these days those countries might be our enemies and or someone in those countries might leak that tech to other countries.
 
Huh? They have reduced their nuclear arsenal from 55,000 to 2,000....

Not in the last treaty, they didn't. They took our carrot, ate it, and belched.
 
They have cut their arsenal from about 55,000 to about 2,000 due to various treaties with the US over the years. That's huge. Every nuke that is out there means more chance it will slip into the hands of terrorists or who knows what. Aegis is just a missile DEFENSE system, it's not an offensive weapon. What is your concern exactly? You worry that we will one day launch ICBMs at them and they'll have an easier time blocking it? Why would we do that?

It doesnt matter if or why! Its a defense system! What drives further inovation in weapons technology?? Its the ongoing ability for someone to develop a weapon that can get past existing defense systems!
If we give someone our defense tech, first of all that gives them a way to design around it, and second it levels the playing field. It cancels itself out. In the name of national security, neither country will willingly allow themselves to be at the mercy of another country. Because of this, their first priority is going to be to develop a weapon that our current defense systems cannot stop. By giving them that tech they know its capabilities and exactly what it will take to get around it.

And as far as it being a strictly defensive weapon, its still a missile! cant you imagine someone simply putting an existing nuclear warhead on that DEFENSIVE weapon?
 
And one of these days those countries might be our enemies and or someone in those countries might leak that tech to other countries.

Look what happened to the vast majority of Russia's military when their government collapsed! It all went to the highest bidder! Thats what could happen again!
 
It doesnt matter if or why! Its a defense system! What drives further inovation in weapons technology?? Its the ongoing ability for someone to develop a weapon that can get past existing defense systems!
If we give someone our defense tech, first of all that gives them a way to design around it, and second it levels the playing field. It cancels itself out. In the name of national security, neither country will willingly allow themselves to be at the mercy of another country. Because of this, their first priority is going to be to develop a weapon that our current defense systems cannot stop. By giving them that tech they know its capabilities and exactly what it will take to get around it.

And as far as it being a strictly defensive weapon, its still a missile! cant you imagine someone simply putting an existing nuclear warhead on that DEFENSIVE weapon?

So lay out what you're worried about? You think we're going to have a nuclear war with Russia? That's just silly.
 
Look what happened to the vast majority of Russia's military when their government collapsed! It all went to the highest bidder! Thats what could happen again!

Right! That's why we need to get as many of those nukes out of there as we can asap.
 
Right! That's why we need to get as many of those nukes out of there as we can asap.

The nukes arent the issue of debate here pal, its the giving away of technology.
 
So lay out what you're worried about? You think we're going to have a nuclear war with Russia? That's just silly.

Why is it silly? Do you think back in the 1940's people thought that our alli would threaten us with nuclear strike after WWII was over? Would they have given them nuclear technology if they did? Its niave to think that just because things arent openly hostile right now, that they couldnt become that way. I hope you never get a position of authority over anyone dependant on you...
 
So lay out what you're worried about? You think we're going to have a nuclear war with Russia? That's just silly.

No. It's about giving away things we don't need to give away with no reason to think we'll get anything meaningful in return.
 
No. It's about giving away things we don't need to give away with no reason to think we'll get anything meaningful in return.

I assume this is BO's way to hit the reset button....the reset button the commies keep throwing at Hillary. This is another effort by BO to weaken the US to make our enemies think more highly of him. He is all but running for the Secretary of the UN once he is done transforming the US into a banana republic.
 
Back
Top Bottom