Sen. DeMint (R-SC), Sec. Gates Clash Over Missile Defense During First START Hearing
On Tuesday, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) clashed head on with Obama administration officials in the first hearing over a new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), a proposed nuclear arms control treaty that the White House has submitted to the Senate for ratification. Senator DeMint hammered home the point that the treaty would limit how future presidents could pursue missile defenses. Secretary Gates brushed off the concerns as did the Committee Chair Senator John Kerry (D-MA) dismissing the notion that the White House has come up with anything but the perfect missile defense plan.
Missile Defense News
But others argue the White House plan is inadequate, furthermore in the future conditions and threats may change—why should the United States have to go back to Russia to get permission to defend itself. Senator Kerry has no problem seeking a permission slip from the Russians. As The New York Times reported, Senator DeMint thinks it is a terrible idea: "With his response, Senator Kerry proved why Americans have a hard time fully trusting the left to put American interests first in foreign affairs."
In fact, the administration knows the proposed treaty limits future missile defense program. That's it why it rushed to rewrite the White House fact sheet which first claimed the treaty put no limits on missile defense. The rewrite suggests that treaty won't limit Obama's plans. Even that statement is cold comfort. Obama's plan does not look like it will be adequate to deal with an Iranian threat, let alone the likes of the Russian nuclear force. Under the government's own estimate Iran could have a long-range missile, three years before it gets a missile defense umbrella up and running in Europe.
Get the FAQs on Missile Defense
In an age where conflicts are no longer confined to battlefields, missile defense is crucial. We must continue developing and improving our ability to detect, track, intercept, and destroy the enemy's missiles, whether short-, medium-, or long-range.
The Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis (IFPA) has created a frequently-asked-questions guide to ballistic missile defense. Free of technical jargon, the guide helps the lay reader understand the state of our missile defense, the nature of threats around the world, and what is required for the future.
For example, some Americans wonder if missile defense is too expensive. According to the IFPA:
"Missile defense spending represents a small portion of the total U.S. defense budget: in 2010 just over $10 billion out of a total defense budget close to $700 billion. This means that missile defense comprises approximately one seventieth of what the nation is spending each year for defense. This amount pales in comparison to the devastating consequences of even a single successful nuclear missile attack against an American city. Even during the Reagan administration'sStrategic Defense Initiative emphasizing defenses against missile attacks, the fraction of the DOD budget devoted to missile defense never rose as high as 2 percent. The present investment level in defenses against missile attacks is also miniscule compared with the nearly $800 billion appropriated in the economic stimulus…It is impossible to calculate the cost of a devastating attack on one or more of our major cities that could be prevented by missile defense."
The IFPA considers its guide a "living document," updated as the need arises. Technology is constantly changing, and Americans should be aware of the importance of our current and future ballistic missile defense capabilities.
forward message visit 33minutes.com
The safety and security of our country has and will always be a top priority for all Americans. The Heritage Foundation's NationalSecurity.org provides accurate and timely information. Sign up for email updates.
The Heritage Foundation - 214 Massachusetts Ave NE, Washington, DC
Call us at 202-546-4400
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Fwd: Sen. DeMint (R-SC), Sec. Gates Clash Over Missile Defense During START Hearings
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment