Video archive of the US Congress

House Proceeding 09-25-09 on Sep 25th, 2009 :: 1:32:00 to 1:38:15
Total video length: 2 hours 45 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

Note: MetaVid video transcripts may contain inaccuracies, help us build a more perfect archive

Download OptionsEmbed Video

Views:123 Duration: 0:06:15 Discussion

Previous speech: Next speech:

Michael R. Turner

1:31:56 to 1:32:16( Edit History Discussion )

Michael R. Turner: when we counted on appeasement, it always hurt us. i just pray we can enough here. i thank you to talk. mr. turner: i appreciate your comments on that. it's very important we look at this through the lens of the administration's policies with respect to russia. there is no historical perspective where conceding to

Michael R. Turner

1:32:00 to 1:38:15( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Michael R. Turner

Michael R. Turner

1:32:17 to 1:32:37( Edit History Discussion )

Michael R. Turner: russia early has ever gained anything at the bargaing table. when you conced to russia pri to entering into negotiations, they say, what else am i going to get when i get to the nornting table? they never say, well, that very great of you. and appreciate what you have done. i'm now going to do something, too. in this instance the president

Michael R. Turner

1:32:38 to 1:32:59( Edit History Discussion )

Michael R. Turner: had already that allegedly went out at the beginning of the year that he was willing to look at conceding on missile defense for russia's help on iran without any indication whatsoever that russia is willing to help. in fact, as you pointed out, representative franks, they have done the opposite. they have been active in selling technology and providing technical assistance to iran. but also iran has shown no

Michael R. Turner

1:33:00 to 1:33:20( Edit History Discussion )

Michael R. Turner: indication of their interest in being dissuaded and in fact the international atomic energy agency says time for persuasion and time for dissuading is over. that iran is now declared by the international atomic energy create a nuclear weapon and that was announced the very same day the president decides to abandon the nuclear -- nuclear shield we

Michael R. Turner

1:33:21 to 1:33:41( Edit History Discussion )

Michael R. Turner: would have had with our missile defense shield. with the president moving from what would have been a 2013 deployment for a missile defense shield in europe to a 2020 protection. i appreciate your points with respect to russia. as we enter our obviously we have a significant amount of concern what this

Michael R. Turner

1:33:42 to 1:34:03( Edit History Discussion )

Michael R. Turner: administration is going to be doing with respect to our strateg assets compromised our missile defense. repr for being with us and participating in this. just to recap where we are timewise, the president has put forth an alternative plan for missile defense that he says is

Michael R. Turner

1:34:04 to 1:34:24( Edit History Discussion )

Michael R. Turner: going to be available for protection for the united states for intercontinental ballistic missiles by 2020. he scrapped a plan that was intended to provide protection for the united states from icbm's by 2013. the intelligence that we have to date shows that iran could have icbm capability by 2015.

Michael R. Turner

1:34:25 to 1:34:46( Edit History Discussion )

Michael R. Turner: the international atomicnergy agency sighs that iran already has nuclear capability. let's put that into a calendar. we would have had a system that would have protected by 2013. the president has taken that off the table. the intelligence agencies say iran could have nuclear capability coupled with missile technology could reach the united states by 2015. the president says that's all

Michael R. Turner

1:34:47 to 1:35:08( Edit History Discussion )

Michael R. Turner: right, we'll wait for another five years and have capability to protect the united states by 20. that's an unreasonable time period to put the united states at threat -- with this threat and it's one we should all be concerned about. i have asked the president and the secretary of defense to declassify this report from the institute for defense analysis.

Michael R. Turner

1:35:09 to 1:35:29( Edit History Discussion )

Michael R. Turner: it's an unclassified excerpt summary which i'm holding here of an independent assessment of the proposed deployment of missiles in europe that says the system he scrapped would have been the most cost-effective. it would have been a system that would have provided 24-hour coverage at the least amount of cost and available as early as seven

Michael R. Turner

1:35:30 to 1:35:51( Edit History Discussion )

Michael R. Turner: years earlier than the president's plan for protecting he united states. while the administration has dismantled our capabilitiesurep rop, at the same time they have cut diffled overall by 1.2 billion, lessening our capabilities in some very important systems. ncluding diminishing by a third our capabilities in alaska. the administration has indicated they can use our alaska ground

Michael R. Turner

1:35:52 to 1:36:13( Edit History Discussion )

Michael R. Turner: based missile systems to protect the united states if iran should get capability earlier, then their system is available on 2020. but to show their commitment to that system, they have cut it by a third. so we are actually going to have less capability there. in addition to the lessening capability in alaska, we are losing the opportunity for what would have been an integrated system.

Michael R. Turner

1:36:14 to 1:36:35( Edit History Discussion )

Michael R. Turner: with thad and aegis and theure peaian system and alaska we would have had opportunity for multiple shots if the united states should have a threat that's posed to us and as this system once in place would have acted as a deterrent to stop the advancement of missile technology and hopefully say to countries that the united states is advancing the type of

Michael R. Turner

1:36:36 to 1:36:57( Edit History Discussion )

Michael R. Turner: technology that would provide us the important protection that we need. the impact of the president's decision on ourure peaian allies is one which many people have gra concern both poland and the czech republic are very concerned this administration unilaterally made the decision to abandon the missile defense shield and to leave them having

Michael R. Turner

1:36:58 to 1:37:18( Edit History Discussion )

Michael R. Turner: taken the step of agreeing with the united states in the face of russian opposition without a united states partner there, without a system moving forward. both of those countries havi made statements indicating their concern of a continuing strong relationship with the united states. i know that we all remain concerned about showing that our -- to r nato allies we remain

Michael R. Turner

1:37:19 to 1:37:39( Edit History Discussion )

Michael R. Turner: committed to a strong missile defense for this country. strong deteence in the area of nuclear proliferation, this administration by taking this step backward weakens overall our capabilities and certainly those relationships. representative bishop, i know one of the areas that you spoke

Michael R. Turner

1:37:40 to 1:38:00( Edit History Discussion )

Michael R. Turner: on at the house armed services committee as we were moving forward with the national defense authorization act, was this cut of $1.2 billion. when we look at what it's doing to alaska, lesseni capability, the missile shield that was there was intended to have 40 kepters. they have significantly

Michael R. Turner

1:38:01 to 1:38:15( Edit History Discussion )

Michael R. Turner: diminished the airborne laser. they have reduced the other programs that they have indicated they are going to rely aegis and thad. lessening the amount of investment that was projected in the f.y. 2009. i know you're concerned about what that cut represents and so

Personal tools

MetaVid is a non-profit project of UC Santa Cruz and the Sunlight Foundation. Learn more About MetaVid

The C-SPAN logo and other servicemarks that may be found in video content are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Metavid