Seventy years later, the Soviets and the Nazis are gone, but other adversaries in the region--including Iran--still threaten America's European allies. But Obama is now balking at plans for missile protections against potential threats:
In a brief announcement, Obama said he was dropping a plan to base interceptor missiles in Poland and build a radar system in the Czech Republic -- a move that could ease tensions with Russia but fan regional fears of resurgent Kremlin influence.
"The best way to responsibly advance our security and the security of our allies is to deploy a missile defense system that best responds to the threats that we face and that utilizes technology that is both proven and cost effective," Obama said. ...
Senator John McCain, the former Republican presidential candidate, blasted the move as "seriously misguided".
The Bush administration had proposed the system amid concerns Iran was trying to develop nuclear warheads it could mount on long-range missiles.
UPDATE: Fox News' Major Garrett is tweeting from the WH press briefing and reports press secretary Robert Gibbs says "new system will be more cost effective, provide more security, and apply to new intel on Iranian threat." This kind of logic sounds familiar--i.e. government health care will be better coverage, cheaper and better care, etc. Let's think logically--how can a radar system provide better coverage than a missile shield?
In addition, Mark Knoller of CBS has relayed, "Robt Gibbs says there was no "quid pro quo" with Russia in exchange for scrapping the Bush plan for missile defense in Europe." Doesn't this seem like a problem to anyone else? The Kremlin is celebrating the fact we're lowing our security in the region and we're not expecting anything in return?