Skip to comments.
Critics Say Missile Defense System Unworkable
Reuters via NYTimes.com ^
| 12/17/2002
Posted on 12/17/2002 4:07:54 PM PST by GeneD
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-68 last
To: GeneD
I'm going to get flamed for this, but I have very little confidence that this missile defense system Bush wants to build will be an effective one. It has done okay thus far in tests, but that is just that - tests. I have read the material from that professor from MIT, and I'm inclined to believe his writings. IMHO, there are more cost-effective ways to stop Americans from being obliterated by warheads.
To: belmont_mark; HalfIrish; NMC EXP; OKCSubmariner; Travis McGee; t-shirt; DoughtyOne; SLB; ...
Well, in truth this is a very modest system indeed, and with the scheduled unilateral nuclear disarmament, is only a drop in the bucket. But still, I just love to see Upper West Side "MAD hatters" squirm...
Very modest indeed, but at least a step in the right direction. We haven't had a missile defense system deployed in nearly three decades. Russia has had theirs for four decades and it is now 8500 ABMs strong enough to shoot down our entire retaliatory strike in the event of a Russian nuclear first strike today. Of course, if Bush makes good on his pledge to disarm the country of 75% of its strategic nuclear deterrent, we will be entirely at the mercy of our Sino-Russian enemies and our superpower status will be a matter of historical reference.
For those interested in affecting a partial reverse of this dangerous situation, please see the following amendment to the Moscow Treaty and urge your Senator to sponsor it or one like it.
Proposed Amendment to the Treaty of Moscow
To: fogarty
To: Southack; All
LOL! I was reading the same thing in the Boston Globe(Ick.) today during lunch and brought this point up.
A liberal claimed it was impossible to perfect so I asked him if he would support it if it DID work. Of course he would not so I think that shows you what bias they have towards Missle Defense.
RLK brings up a very good point. Most of the detractors say that swarms of nukes would overwhelm the system, proving it useless. I dont see SWARMS of missles coming, just a few.
It seems to me like they are reading from thier playbook of appeasement to the USSR. That was the only country that could throw swarms of missles at us.
Amazingly enough, the UK is doing research into this area but they state that it is to stop foreign objects such as asteroids... are they rogue? :D
The Dems claim that the GOP is playing politics with the missle defense system but do they really think that we WANT a useless system!?!?!?
It's easy to see WHO is playing politics on this one, and the fact that they would play politics on this issue speaks volumes to me. Lets hope the rest of the country can see it.
64
posted on
12/18/2002 4:12:02 PM PST
by
Arioch7
To: Southack; Alamo-Girl
Bump. The NYT is not the only miscreant, of course. The MRC did a nice study of Brian Williams, MSNBC's Sad Sack, click
here to see what passes for unbiassed coverage nowadays...
To: rightwing2
Bump. Good resolution!
To: GeneD
These "critics" fall into one of two groups: either they are the domestic touchy-feely types who fear for their funding for gay alcoholic chickens hooked on drugs, or the out and out agents of foreign powers who are just doing their jobs.
Of course according to them lots of things may not work in real life: airplanes, radar, kites, VCRs, toilets, microwave ovens... you get the drift.
To: Paul Ross
Thanks for the heads up!
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-68 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson