19 December 2004
Star Wars still a bad idea
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
http://www.jsonline.com/news/editorials/dec04/285055.asp
Ever since March 23, 1983, a few Americans have been in thrall to the dream that it might be possible to protect this country from enemy missiles by shooting them from the sky before they land on our cities. That was when President Reagan went on television and announced an ambitious missile defense program that came to be known as "Star Wars." That program has changed dramatically since 1983, but one thing that has not changed is the cluster of problems that make the dream an unrealistic and unnecessary extravagance.
The immense scientific and technological problems associated with
ballistic missile defense were underlined Wednesday when a rocket that was supposed to home in on a simulated enemy missile never even got off the ground. This "unknown anomaly," as it was
primly termed, was the latest in a series of technical glitches that have hampered the program since its inception.
Unfortunately, some people associated with this program seem to be in a state of denial about these problems. They refuse to face up to the possibility that they may be insurmountable, as some scientific critics have warned. The spokesman for the Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency went so far as to dispute the suggestion that Wednesday's failure was a failure, saying simply that "we weren't able to complete the test that we had planned."
Even though these problems have not yet been solved - or perhaps fully recognized - the Bush administration has ordered the Pentagon to proceed with initial deployment of a limited missile defense system, reasoning that an imperfect defense is better than none. But, as Wednesday's setback shows, the shield as it now exists will confer no protection at all, and 20 years of failure suggest that it may never provide any. It will, however, eat up money.
When Reagan unveiled it, Star Wars was supposed to protect us from Soviet missiles. Now that the Soviet Union is dead, the Bush
administration has conjured up the idea that missile defense is necessary to protect the U.S. from terrorists and such rogue nations as North Korea.
People like Osama bin Laden, however, do not favor intercontinental ballistic missiles, simply because they have no reason to. Terrorists cause a lot of damage with simple weapons such as car bombs, booby traps, mortars and fuel-laden airliners. Even if it worked perfectly, ballistic missile defense would provide no protection against these threats.
And even if North Korea had a missile capable of reaching this country, it would likely be deterred from launching it by the knowledge that doing so would provoke a devastating U.S. reprisal. Kim Jong Il may be a ruthless dictator, but he's not suicidal.
U.S. taxpayers have coughed up more than $80 billion for missile defense since 1985, with almost nothing to show for it, and the program is slated to cost another $50 billion or more in the next five years. And these are not make-believe dollars. These are real dollars that could be used for better things. It's time to stop wasting them.
