Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (216176)	1/9/2002 3:05:56 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Possibly... although it might be cheaper to buy off North Korea (with China's help), make friends with Iran (already the kids there love America, and oppose their theocratic leadership), and engineer a 'change of leadership' in Iraq. My main problem with proposed ABM systems (I am for them in principle, if they - of course - actually WORK, and they are cost-effective for their purpose) --- is that only space based weapons are likely to have the 'spot on' capability to destroy ICBMs in their most vulnerable and fuel-laden early launch stage. ... And, to develop an effective orbital defense system it is necessary that we first have cost-effective orbital launch capability: on the order of at least 10 to 1 better than what we have now with the antiquated shuttle fleet, preferably a 100 to 1 improvement in the cost of every pound lifted to orbit is desired. This requires the IMMEDIATE pursuit of a replacement for our shuttle 'fleet'.... Which would also provide the ancillary benefit of greatly expanding commercial and scientific possibilities... unlike the construction of theater-based ABM interceptors, which would produce little ancillary commercial benefit for all the R & D dollars which would be poured into the program. Unfortunately, the shuttle replacement program is the one thing related to ABM that the new President Bush has cut... Which leaves me with the uncomfortable feeling that his planned "ABM" system may turn out to be more a boondoggle, or a costly annuity program for the defense industry, or a trading card for foreign use (as was Reagan's mythical system), or a Maginot Line for the 21st. Century... anything but a: 1) cost effective defensive system or 2) a cost effective spur to the American commercial development and domination of near-Earth space. In short, I haven't seen anything yet that gives me the slightest bit of confidence that they know their ass from a hole-in-the-ground strategicly, or alternately... that they know what is best economicly for the national interests. The much balihooed, Rumsfeld-led, Defense Dept. and disposition of forces strategic review that was promised during the campaign and during the early months of the administration... labored mightily... and didn't even produce a mouse. Color me "unconvinced" until I actually see something that resembles innovative strategic thought.