Replies

Complete modernization of U.S. nuclear forces(from strategic,naval and tactical nuclear forces) is imperative and should be the number one priority in light of rhetoric ....

I concur completely, but I'm not sure Bush made the right play by ordering a $60 billion carve-out in 2001 (pre-9/11) from existing DoD priorities and programs (all Congressionally-approved and budgeted) for the SDI program.

Besides, I have a big, fat constitutional problem with his having done that. When Dick Nixon did it, it was called impoundment, and it was agreed at the time that impoundment was unconstitutional. This is impoundment-plus: "Not only am I, your President, going to impound the Interior Department budget, but I'm going to spend it all on export subsidies -- so there." I don't think you can wash these carve-outs constitutionally. That's a business-management technique, not a good-government technique.

I agree. He has made a bad decision on carving DOD programs for making money available for SDI and theatre defense. I think that out of the nuclear modernization program you can create a very excellent ABM program. However, complete nuclear modernization of naval,strategic(land based),and tactical nuclear programs should be priority number one because we have not had new missile in over 20 years. The B-52 program is being extended to the year 2040. The plane came into full activation in 1953 when Harry Truman was president. Many programs in our arsenal are starting to show their age. The time has come for new U.S. ballistic missile system and a new bomber program to counter Russian and Chinese aspirations.