Missile Defense

[Alan L.]

I'm hearing on the news that because this attack would not have been prevented if Bush's missile defense system were in place, it will begin to lose support. To me this is flawed, as what happened yesterday just serves to remind us that terrorists will use whatever weapon or tactic is available to inflict the most death and destruction within their power.

Someone likened this to leaving the back door unlocked since the previous burglar came through the front door.

I have no doubts that terrorist groups and especially rogue governments are near the ability to make a nuclear bomb and to deliver it. What happened yesterday reinforces my view that they also have the inclination to use it.

Alan L., TX

 

[Boondox]

Star Wars has been a waste of money since the Soviet bloc fell apart, IMO. It's good for business, and will certainly boost certain technologies whether or not it eventually works, but nations or organizations with the technology to launch a missile are known, and can be thwarted in other ways. Besides, launching a missile (unless from a submarine) puts an X marks the spot for retaliation.

I think the use of nuclear weapons by terrorists is a possibility, but I'm far more concerned by those missing Russian suitcase nukes. One of those could be hidden in an airliner, ship, train, bus, or even a little car parked on Wall Street. Star Wars won't help with that sort of threat. More and better intelligence would, and at a significant cost savings.

Just my $0.02 based on fourteen years of naval service surrounded by tactical nukes.

Pete

www.GatewayToVermont.com

 

[AndyR]

All the tools in the world are useless if you don't know how and where to use them. Resourceful terrorists do not need complex weaponry as we have just clearly seen. Star Wars type programs are a collosal boondoggle that feed defense contractors. I have worked in that industry in the past - I know.

Our efforts and money would be far better spent on intelligence and a bit of awareness.

Andy in NH

 

[ejb]

>>Someone likened this to leaving the back door unlocked since the previous burglar came through the front door.

Yes, leave it to the democrats in congress to take advantage of 20 or 30,000 dead americans to further their own political agenda. Anyone ever notice that democrats don't seem to mind standing on a pile of bodies and taking advantage of the situation? Now we need missle defense more than ever. It has been demonstrated to the american people very clearly that there are bad people in this world that will stop at nothing to annihilate this country.

 

[GlueGuy]

Missile defense is a collosal waste of time,effort and money. If I were a 3rd worls country, I wouldn't waste time on designing/building/launching missiles; I would put a bomb on a row boat and float it into a harbor. Show me a missile defense against that.

The events on Tuesady just underscored that. Don't need to build big, elaborate offense when you can use your enemy's own tools against them.

The GlueGuy

 

[Alan L.]

Ask Isreal about the scuds. If they can do it, they will.

Alan L., TX

 

[Rick Jay]

Hi All,

I think that horrific events such as those we've witnessed in the recent past underscore the requirement that we have as many tools in our arsenal as possible to thwart the modern day terrorist.

Yes, we need better intelligence. Yes, we might some day be faced with a "suitcase" nuclear device. Yes, we might have a load of arsenic dumped in a major water supply. Or a biological agent released in a major city. The possibilities that the criminal mind will dream up are unfathomable to those of us who are civilized.

However, I feel that we also need the missile defense plan. Remember, the states of the former Soviet Union still have their missiles. China still has theirs. We need to be strong on all fronts.

I am not an expert on such "high tech" weapons, but it would seem to me that a system designed to blast a Mach 3+ missile out of the sky could probably do pretty well against an object the size of an airliner flying at 500 mph. I don't wish to raise the issue of destroying a passenger jet full of innocent citizens, but considering what just happened, it might be a possibility (God forbid) we will be forced to face in the future.

The price to maintain our freedom is high. I would much rather pay that price with dollars spent on new technology than with American blood. Don't get me wrong, I know that "high tech" is not the only answer here, but I do think it is a good part of the answer. Given the choice, I would much rather send a handful of high-dollar micro-chips to their demise than have our military and/or civilian personal put in harms way.

I pray that when I wake up tomorrow the whole world will see the horror of this act and understand the potential ramifications. I hope every country on earth, all religions, races and creeds, see the ugliness of such despicable acts and the horrors of war and agree to never again wage war or cause terrorist acts.

I can hope...and I can pray. Reality, however, is quite different, and until my hopes are realized, I believe we need to do whatever possible to ensure the safety, freedom and bounty that God bestows upon this great country.

God Bless the United States of America and may His Peace extend throughout the world.

Rick Jay

 

[TerryinMD]

One of the bigger issues with creating high tech defense systems is the WAY that they are managed and funded. We have all heard of the ridiculous $400 hammer and toilet seats that the Gub' mint contracted.

With these larger high tech systems, it is typical for the Government to bid them out as cost plus contracts not fixed rate contracts with hard deliverables. What you are really seeing with these systems is that the Governments wraps up R&D and production in one contract. Let me see, does that add up to cost overruns. DING!!! Yes.

How do we fix this problem? Don't know. Just prior to Tuesday's attacks, Sec. Rumsfield (sp?) was suggesting a revamp of the military/industrial system. I hope he continues that effort. I have worked as a Government contractor and can tell you that it is rife with waste and cronyism. I personally know of one situation where a two star general retired on Friday and was a VP of a major government contractor on Monday working on "special projects". I'll say no more. /w3tcompact/icons/crazy.gif

I have since left contracting and gone back to the private sector.

Do we need modern systems? Yes. Now how do we effectively create and manage the process to develop them when the ex-military is involved with this process? I wish I had an answer.

Terry

 

[Hillbilly]

I think the talk alone about missle defense alone during the Regan era,kept the pressure on the old Soviet Union goverment and helped impede its collapse,even whether or not the United States actually thought it was viable or not.
A lot to be said about psychological warfare. IMO

 

[toddler]

The problem with missile defense systems is that you spend billions on a system to destroy current technology, and your opponents spend a few million to build a better missile. Or they do something else. If the terrorists has released anthrax upwind of DC, we wouldn't have a government today. Maybe what we should spend the money on instead is decentralizing the federal government.
Todd