|
"Effective measures to limit antiballistic-missile
systems would be a substantial factor in curbing the race in
strategic offensive arms and would lead to a decrease in the
risk of outbreak of war involving nuclear weapons." The
previous utopian premise, which was the basis for the
implementation of the Antiballistic Missile Treaty (ABM) way
back in 1972, has been proven false after nearly thirty years.
Certainly the world has avoided nuclear confrontation, but the
misguided, illogical, unreasonable ABM treaty had nothing to do
with it. Credit for sidestepping a nuclear holocaust goes to
Mutually Assured Destruction employed by God-fearing Ronald
Reagan and pragmatic humanists formerly running the Soviet
Union.
Unfortunately, the great tax-cutter and patriot is living out
his days unawares, and thankfully, the Russian commies have been
temporarily muzzled. The Cold War is long over and that terrible
but highly effective suicide doctrine known more affectionately
by its acronym, MAD, is not really applicable in this day and
age.
I won’t get into the popular mantra being batted back and
forth by the experts that says the real threats now in this
post-Cold War world are the rogue third-worlders in Asia and the
impassioned Islamic republics comprising the Middle East, except
to say that this analysis is an accurate assessment of the
present geopolitical landscape. The question now becomes how
does the United States protect itself and even our allies from
the likes of a renegade Muslim terrorist or a crazed,
anti-American East Asian Bolshevik eager to try out his new
ballistic missile toys against us?
For starters, discard the ABM treaty. Never has an agreement
so handcuffed its signatories and prevented sovereign nations
from defending their own citizens and consequently ensuring
accelerated arms proliferation to account for treaty-mandated
defenselessness. How dare the United States and the Soviet Union
want to protect their respective peoples from nuclear
annihilation. The notion is absurd, and runs against common
sense. Moreover, it didn’t achieve (predictably) what its
preamble aimed to do, which was "curbing the race in
strategic offensive arms." On the contrary, with both the
USSR and the U.S. knowing of the others vulnerability, the two
sides were ostensibly free to destroy the other with the
knowledge that the other couldn’t defend itself. Hence the
need for SALT II, START I & II and various other
non-proliferation attempts.
And even if we allow that the treaty was good policy, and
that American and Soviet adherence was desirable, enforcing
compliance was a lost cause. During treaty negotiations, the
U.S. was concerned about Soviet ability to upgrade their
extensive SAM systems to give them ABM capabilities. Article VI
of the agreement supposedly "remedied" the American
concern with a caveat that expressly prohibited non-ABM systems,
such as SAMs, from having "capabilities to counter
strategic ballistic missiles" or from being "tested in
an ABM mode." But as documents and records that have
recently come to light show, the Soviets didn’t abide by the
rules; indeed, they developed missile defenses while honest, yet
naïve American policy makers adhered to the ABM treaty.
American intelligence gathering has proven this.
Living by the treaty also weds us to an agreement whose other
signatory doesn’t even exist now. Russia hasn’t had to abide
by the ABM pact since the dissolution of the USSR in 1990-91.
Yet the United States is expected to continue compliance with
the agreement. And more than that, does anyone else think Iran
or Iraq or North Korea abides by the treaty’s dictates?
Missile defense proponents have hammered this point for years
now, but the point must be continually made because liberals don’t
seem to be listening.
And because they aren’t listening, our enemies are able to
arm themselves to the proverbial tooth with ICBM’s, while the
U.S. sits defenseless against missile attack. Until missile
defense deployment is a reality, American intelligence gatherers
must be equipped to counter and even check the widespread
proliferation of nukes and delivery systems. That means the CIA
and the NSA must be funded to the hilt so they are able to cover
the globe intercepting thuggish intentions before they are
hellishly hatched by anti-American punks. This necessitates a
more vigorous covert actions effort to agitate and weaken foes
abroad, and ideally stop any attempts to nuke or otherwise
attack the United States.
Covert actions are an integral part of a formidable and
comprehensive defensive security strategy. The ability and
willingness to successfully undertake covert action renders
other elements of national security sustainable. Clandestine
operations enable American policy makers, operating without the
luxury of missile defense, to check hostile actions before they
happen without having to trot out the United States military.
Secret intelligence collection often times can serve as a means
to illuminate to the world the fiendish intent of a communist
rogue or a Muslim extremist about to shower a particular region
or even the world in radiation. Reality tells us that Russia and
China are so taken with the selling of arms to anyone able to
pony up the cash, that the CIA’s ability to counter the
acquisition of missiles by America’s enemies is essential as
America’s first line of defense. Interdictory covert actions
are preemptive measures that, sadly, provide the best means of
defending our people -- so long as we are without missile
defense.
And seeing as the task before the CIA is daunting, we must
finally develop and deploy missile defense. We need land, sea
and space based defenses, as well as air-to-air means of downing
incoming missiles. We need missile defense regardless of what
Russia, China, the EU, NATO or anyone else says. We need the
protection because our Constitution demands it. Recall that line
in there about "providing for the common defense"? It
doesn’t state, "provide for the common defense only if
other nations agree." Despite the baseless, illogical
out-of-date protests of elitists, socialists and communists
operating in places like Moscow or Beijing or London or Paris or
Geneva or even New York City and Washington D.C., Americans must
have sufficient protection from nuclear strikes be they from
Russia, China, Iraq or anyone else because it’s in our best
interest. How can anyone be against protecting our citizens from
nuclear destruction? Only those people and nations that have
intentions of lobbing bombs onto U.S. soil and want to do so
unimpeded.
There also seems to be a race of liberal politicians that don’t
really care about American sovereignty and defense of Americans.
That’s as simple as it gets. Because the notion that missile
defense will somehow result in a renewed arms race is just plain
silly and provably false. The absence of defensive systems
encourages arms races. Just look at the years following the
enactment of the ABM Treaty; unfettered proliferation by the
U.S. and USSR. Both sides had no other choice since they were
forbidden to develop defenses.
Use the example of basketball to illustrate the ridiculous
logic of the treaty. If you gave two NBA teams 48 minutes to
play a game, but then said that neither team could play any
defense, what do you think both teams would do in order to win
the game? Each team will increase offensive production by
scoring every time down the court in a race to score as many
points as possible. This is by and large what the ABM treaty
told the Soviets and Americans to go and do. Without the
additional deterrence of a defensive system, both sides continue
to prepare for the total defeat of the other.
So let’s take this message to our friends and foes alike
and persuade them with reason and logic as to why research must
be undertaken so that we can develop a workable missile defense
system as soon as possible. If we don’t, the liberals will
continue to delay testing and deployment by claiming the system
is unworkable. Never mind the FACT that the system is
unworkable at present and will continue to be until
the Congress funds research and development adequate to meet the
demands of such a system! We’ve taken people to the moon; we’ve
developed surface to air missiles capable of knocking down
projectiles (admittedly jets going much slower). The technology
is there, and only requires a concerted effort on the part of
our government to push the task to its completion.
|
Shop PUSA
Way Out There in the Blue: Reagan
and Star Wars and the End of the Cold War
by Frances Fitzgerald
Scan your PC for viruses now!
Magazine of the Month
At Any Cost: How Al Gore Tried to
Steal the Election
by Bill Sammon
DVD's Under $10 at buy.com!
Cigar.com
Being Dead
by Jim Crace
Bitter Legacy
by Christopher Ruddy & Carl Limbacher
Leather -
Sale (30 to 50% off)
Shop for Your Princess at DisneyStore.com 
Saddam's Bombmaker: The
Terrifying Inside Story of the Iraqi Nuclear and Biological
Weapons Agenda
by Khidr Hamzah, Jeff Stein
Search
the Web for:
Death Penalty
Ronald
Reagan
Middle
East
MP3
Web Music
George
W. Bush
Saddam Hussein
Online Gambling
Auto Loans
Free Online Games
NFL
Nascar
Britney Spears
|
