Obama Backs Unproven Missile Defense for Uncertain Threat

[Purveyor]

By Gopal Ratnam and Tony Capaccio - Mar 18, 2013

The Obama administration’s decision to shift $1 billion to a missile-defense system in the U.S. is raising questions about the still-unproven missile shield’s effectiveness and the threats posed by North Korea and Iran.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said March 15 that the Pentagon would add 14 land-based interceptors in Alaska in response to threats from North Korea. To pay for that move and develop an advanced warhead, about $1 billion would be shifted from efforts to develop a missile shield in Poland and Romania.

The money would go toward expanding the current arsenal of 30 interceptors the Pentagon has fielded as part of its Ground- Based Midcourse Defense system, which is designed to shoot down long-range intercontinental ballistic missiles. The system’s poor test record and history of technical malfunctions have clouded whether it can reliably stop long-range missiles such as the ones that North Korea and Iran are suspected of developing.

At best, the announcement may be a symbolic one to reassure U.S. allies South Korea and Japan that President Barack Obama takes saber-rattling by North Korea seriously, as well as to win some Republican support at home, said Joseph Cirincione, president of the Ploughshares Fund, a San Francisco-based security research policy group.

MORE...

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-19/obama-backs-unproven-missile-defense-for-uncertain-threat.html

[HereSince1628]

1. Diverting the missle defense systems was a highly politicized action

That mostly works in the favor of throwing money at the DD.

[TwilightGardener]

3. But we're canceling a phase of missile defense in Europe, which hopefully

will make up for the expense--just a shifting of money.

[TwilightGardener]

2. Yeah...but I'd rather have "unreliable" than "nothing" if something comes our way.

Don't know why they can't be made more reliable, but...I have no problem whatsoever with missile defense--otherwise all we have is the threat of using our nukes in retaliation, AFTER some city gets cooked. Oddly, the Russians seem to think they work, because they sure didn't want them in Poland. Either way, I was reading a disturbing report on HuffPo that N Korea is probably more interested in selling its nuke capabilities to rogue entities than developing a warhead that can hit us. Hope we're watching every ship.