-Caveat Lector- WJPBR Email News List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Peace at any cost is a Prelude to War! Military Support Tepid for NMD NewsMax.com Wires Friday, March 2, 2001 WASHINGTON (UPI) – With as much as $60 billion on the line and more immediate threats facing them, a national missile defense (NMD) system is a hard pill for many in the military to swallow. But support has increased recently. "The chiefs question putting additional billions of taxpayers' dollars into fielding a system now that does not work or has not proven itself," said Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Henry Shelton in 1999 in a February interview with Sea Power magazine. The military chiefs have testified numerous times that they would welcome a robust NMD program – but only if the money to pay for it is added to their budget. If they need to shift funding from what they consider more pressing needs, they are reluctant to endorse the system. The Pentagon is working on a limited NMD system designed to intercept and destroy two dozen enemy warheads as they travel through outer space. The system will cost between $30 billion and $60 billion over 20 years. It includes giant radar systems and 100 interceptor missiles, in addition to new satellites and surveillance systems. But the technological path so far has been a rocky one. Only the first of three $100 million intercept attempts was successful, convincing then-President Bill Clinton last fall to defer the decision to deploy the system to the Bush administration. The next intercept test is scheduled for early this summer. "As I have testified before, the NMD program continues to be high-risk. The schedule is compressed, and a significant setback in one element can delay the entire program," said Lt. Gen. Ronald Kadish, director of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, in congressional testimony last year. "I would support building it if the threat warranted it, and not just if it is feasible. It has to be practical too. 'Feasible' means that you would put a heck of a lot of money against something just to get it up there. 'Practical' means that we could get it up without breaking the bank," Air Force Chief of Staff General Michael Ryan said in 1998, with the endorsement of the Navy and Marine Corps chiefs. Technical and affordability problems are not the only ones NMD faces. It also poses considerable diplomatic and political challenges. As Clinton's deployment decision loomed last year, a group of national security experts – including former Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs Gen. John Shalikashvili and former Vice Chairmen Adm. William Owens – urged a delay. They reasoned that until the effect on international arms control treaties could be assessed, NMD might make the world more dangerous rather than less dangerous. China and Russia have warned NMD could trigger a global arms race, putting even more stress on the military. For years the military chiefs have told Congress that theater missile defense – systems such as the Patriot, designed to protect troops on the battlefield from widely available short-range missiles – outranks a national missile defense on their priority list. Increasing Support Recently But in the last year, top military officers have publicly shifted their view of the threat posed by long-range missiles to the United States, throwing their support behind the notion that the country's civilian population faces a threat nearly as menacing as that faced by soldiers on the battlefield. "I would simply like to underscore the secretary's comments about missile threats that American faces," Shelton said last year. It was a subtle but significant endorsement for then-Defense Secretary William Cohen's plan to develop a missile defense system to meet the threat posed by rogue nations that have or are developing long-range missiles, such as Iran, Iraq and North Korea. What largely turned the tide in the Clinton administration and in Congress was a report by a commission headed by Donald Rumsfeld – now defense secretary under President Bush. The commission included Rumsfeld's probable deputy defense secretary, Paul D. Wolfowitz. That report asserted it would take a determined nation only five years to develop a long-range missile. "The newer ballistic missile-equipped nations' capabilities will not match those of U.S. systems for accuracy or reliability. However, they would be able to inflict major destruction on the United States within about five years of a decision to acquire such a capability," stated the report. Moreover, the report asserted the United States "might well have little or no warning before operational deployment" of a missile by Iran, Iraq, North Korea or another potentially hostile state. Bush has stated his intention to deploy a missile defense system that could protect not only the United States, but also its allies and friends – presumably NATO countries and Israel. Bush has not defined the system nor said how much he is prepared to add to the Pentagon budget – if at all – to pay for it. Copyright 2001 by United Press International. All rights reserved. *COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for nonprofit research and educational purposes only.[Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ] Want to be on our lists? Write at [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a menu of our lists! <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
