New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

Technology has always found its greatest consumer in a nation's war and defense efforts. Since the last attempts at a "Star Wars" defense system, has technology changed considerably enough to make the latest Missile Defense initiatives more successful? Can such an application of science be successful? Is a militarized space inevitable, necessary or impossible?

Read Debates, a new Web-only feature culled from Readers' Opinions, published every Thursday.

almarst2002 - 02:50pm Dec 17, 2002 EST (# 6796 of 6822)

Afghanistan: The First Puppet Regime in the Post Sept 11 World - http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=49&ItemID=2565

almarst2002 - 02:56pm Dec 17, 2002 EST (# 6797 of 6822)

"For America and King George!" Oh, and for democracy, too. " - http://www.commondreams.org/views02/1216-03.htm

wrcooper - 03:01pm Dec 17, 2002 EST (# 6798 of 6822)

December 17, 2002

Bush Orders Military to Build Limited Missile Defense by 2004

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON -- President Bush said Tuesday he will begin deploying a limited system to defend the nation against ballistic missiles by 2004.

Though the first parts of the system will be put into use while more advanced technology is still being developed, Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld said it will likely stop "a relatively small number of incoming ballistic missiles, which is better than nothing."

As a candidate, Bush promised to build an anti-missile shield, and earlier this year he pulled out of an anti-ballistic missile treaty to advance the plan. Tuesday, he cited the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on America as evidence that the country faces "unprecedented threats" and needs the anti-missile shield.

"When I came to office, I made a commitment to transform America's national security strategy and defense capabilities to meet the threats of the 21st century," Bush said in a prepared statement. "Today I am pleased to announce we will take another important step in countering these threats by beginning to field missile defense capabilities to protect the United States as well as our friends and allies."

He called the initial stage "modest," but said, "These capabilities will add to America's security and serve as a starting point for improved and expanded capabilities later as further progress is made in researching and developing missile defense technologies and in light of changes in the threat."

The plan calls for 10 ground-based interceptor missiles at Fort Greely, Alaska, by 2004 and an additional 10 interceptors by 2005 or 2006, defense officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Bush said the "initial capabilities" will also include sea-based interceptors and sensors based on land, at sea and in space.

Asked at a Pentagon press conference how he could be confident in fielding a system considering some recent failures in testing, Rumsfeld said, "most things don't just arrive fully developed."

"The way to think about the missile defense program is that ... it will evolve over time."

Rumsfeld used as an example the Predator unmanned aerial vehicle, the spy plane that became a big asset in the war in Afghanistan although it was still in testing. The Predator allowed troops to gather intelligence without endangering pilots and ones fitted with missiles allowed the CIA to carry out attacks without endangering their agents.

MORE

wrcooper - 03:01pm Dec 17, 2002 EST (# 6799 of 6822)

Rep. Duncan Hunter, the likely next chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, lauded the decision to proceed on missile defense and said Congress would likely approve additional money. He said an extra $1.5 billion would likely be needed over the next two years for the program that was budgeted for $7.8 billion in 2003.

"Today, the United States cannot stop a single ballistic missile headed for an American city," said Hunter, R-Calif., who chairs Armed Services subcommittee on military research and development. "The consequences of such an attack would be devastating, and the danger continues to grow as nations such as North Korea, Iraq, and Iran continue to develop, purchase, and sell advanced ballistic missile technologies."

But David Sirota, spokesman for Democrats on the House Appropriations Committee, questioned Bush's priorities.

"If George Bush thinks we are so flush with cash that we can afford billions to deploy a technology that might not even work, then why has he repeatedly rejected funding for basic security like border patrol, Coast Guard and immigration services that we know is desperately needed to prevent another September 11th?" he said.

Bush's announcement came six days after the latest test of the system failed when an interceptor rocket did not separate from its booster rocket and destroy a Minuteman II intercontinental ballistic missile as planned.

Three of eight tests of the interceptors have been judged failures by the military.

The initial Bush plan is more limited than the Strategic Defense Initiative envisioned by President Reagan in 1983 that came to be known as "Star Wars."

Still, Bush expanded the program significantly from the ground-based plan pursued by President Clinton by also ordering research and testing on sea-based and space-based systems.

The Pentagon has begun conducting tests with short-range missile-defense systems that were prohibited by the ABM Treaty and has built and tested mobile and sea-based sensors to track missiles.

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said the missile defense timing had nothing to do with North Korea's recent admission that it had a secret program to enrich uranium to make nuclear weapons. But, he noted, Bush cited North Korea as a threat when he promised during his campaign to build an anti-missile safety net.

The United States has asked to use a radar complex in northern England as part of a global missile defense shield, the British government said Tuesday. American officials have also asked NATO member Denmark if it can upgrade a radar station at an American Air Force base in Greenland as part of the system.

(23 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense