Democrats to Gut Missile Defense
Despite the growing threat of rogue nations acquiring nuclear-tipped ICBM’s, the Democratic Congress plans to gut the budget for missile defense. Here’s their strategy for rationalizing their action:
Former Assistant Secretary of Defense Frank Gaffney explains how the game works: “The idea is that we put it [missile defense] on ice until absolutely everybody is satisfied. It is a formula for not having the missile defense we need.” Critics hope to stop missile defense by devoting its entire budget to testing, which is costly.
The Democrats are essentially saying that we shouldn’t spend money on something vital to protecting us from rogue nations like North Korea and Iran because we don’t have all the bugs worked out. I remember when liberals were carping about spening money on the Stealth bomber program because there were some flaws in it. Less than a decade later, it was devastating Baghdad.
Simply put, this is proof that Democrats are more worried about public opinion than about protecting America. If the choice is whether we should be worried about allies or protecting Americans, I suspect that most people would choose protecting Americans over any other consideration.
While the Democratic lawmakers insist they support “fielding a limited defense capability that works,” they still see missile defense as a boondoggle. The letter writers contend: “Since the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) was launched in the mid 1980’s the United States has spent nearly $100 billion dollars on missile defense programs and studies with little to show for it.”
Since when have Democrats been interested in military equipment that does what it’s supposed to do? I’ve heard some insulting things in my life but that’s within whispering distance of the top of the list.
That letter should be insulting to every American for another reason. Anything that Americans have set out to accomplish, they’ve accomplished. If man can dream it, Americans can accomplish it. It’s that simple. Look at our history. We built a transcontinental railroad and the Golden Gate Bridge and we put a man on the moon when few people thought we could even orbit the earth.
Now Democrats are essentially saying that building a missile defense shield is impossible? That’s downright scary.
Technorati Tags: Missile Defense, Reagan, Nuclear Weapons, Ahmadinejad, Kim Jung Il, National Security
Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog
December 3rd, 2006 at 5:40 pm
[...] Cross-posted at California Conservative Categories: Military, Liberals, Homeland Security, Iran, Democrats | [...]
December 3rd, 2006 at 10:43 pm
So which is worse… gutting a program that doesn’t work and focusing on alternatives, or continuing a fallacy through to completion, when the enemy lobs a missile at us and the “shield” doesn’t protect us?
December 4th, 2006 at 12:16 pm
Anything that Americans have set out to accomplish, they’ve accomplished. If man can dream it, Americans can accomplish it. It’s that simple. Look at our history.
What about the space pen. Tens of millions spent on developing a pen that worked in space. They then showed the russians this great invention and the russians said that is really great. We use pencils
Moral of the story just because something is expensive and sounds really good. Does not mean it is more effective or cost effective.
December 4th, 2006 at 1:16 pm
Rumsfeld’s Pre-Resignation Memo Calls for Change…
Prior to his resignation, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld presented a classified memo to the White…
December 4th, 2006 at 1:54 pm
Soon Democratic Party demands Koran be the state law and Religion.
Coming soon to a nightmare near you.
December 4th, 2006 at 2:34 pm
Simon, interesting anecdote.
Funny thing is: y’know the difference between a pen and a pencil? One can be easily erased — which is what’s happening to America’s proud history of achievements at the hands of special interests.
Unfortunately, aiding this activity is widespread public ignorance and apathy.
They listen to the people preaching anti-Western hate and some start wondering, “Hmm, maybe they (those radicals) have a point.” Like, “maybe 9/11 is our fault.” That sort of crazy talk.
But at the end of the day, in the case of medical emergency, all the hate-mongers who can afford it will fly to America because we’ve got the best technology and the best trained doctors using the latest advancements and leadership in medicine. And that’s just one example.
Would anybody fly to the Middle East for medical attention? (they give a whole new meaning to cutting healthcare)
Let’s not cut defense, either. As long as radical Islam is plotting to destroy us, we need it more than ever.
December 5th, 2006 at 3:30 am
Simon, interesting anecdote.
Funny thing is: y’know the difference between a pen and a pencil? One can be easily erased — which is what’s happening to America’s proud history of achievements at the hands of special interests.
You have totally ignored my point.
Let’s not cut defense, either. As long as radical Islam is plotting to destroy us, we need it more than ever.
As the letter says after a spend of 100 billion you have no defence for that money. Cutting that money is not cutting defence because it has created simply no defense. You have no defence shield if north korea wanted to lop a missile what could stop it? Nothing
However 100 billion on stealth bombers, spy satellites, bombing North Korea silo’s etc would.