When National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice finally testifies today before the special commission investigating the 9/11 attacks, some of the questioning ought to be about missile defense. That was clearly the Bush administration's top security concern in the months while terrorists were plotting to turn commercial airliners into missiles that attacked New York and Washington.
It was, in fact, Michigan U.S. Sen. Carl Levin, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, who prevailed over the Sept. 6, 2001, objections of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in shifting money the administration wanted to spend on the unproven missile defense system into counterterrorism efforts.
The Washington Post reported last week that on the very day of the 9/11 attacks, Rice had been scheduled to deliver a speech on the need for missile defense. The concept has been around since the Reagan era, when it was dubbed "Star Wars." Its most recent incarnations involve a highly sensitive radar umbrella that detects incoming missiles for a pinpoint response that destroys them in the air. The administration is continuing to pursue development of this system, which has delivered mixed results in test-firings.
In the interest of keeping the 9/11 probe constructive, Rice ought to be asked if the billions being spent on the system might be better invested in smarter ways to keep maniacs with box cutters from hijacking planes. She ought to be asked, too, if other domestic security needs are being adequately met for this new kind of war against stateless enemies who can launch deadly attacks without launching missiles. And perhaps Rice could address a question on whether the money going to missile defense would be put to better use rounding up and dismantling nuclear weapons that could fall into dangerous hands and be delivered by truck.
More:
http://www.freep.com/voices/editorials/eterr8_20040408.htm
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
