Dean will retain part of missile defense program

[wyldwolf]

Per new rules:

Title of post: Dean will retain part of missile defense program
My candidate: Wesley Clark

In an associated press interview, Howard Dean says "he would retain part of the Bush administration's missile defense program if elected president."

To his credit, he put Social Security and education out of reach for cost-cutters, promising details of his balanced budget plans at a later date.

The former Vermont governor also pledged to balance the federal budget -- probably not in his first term, though -- by being willing to restrain spending on programs dear to Democrats.

Dean said Republicans may need a balanced budget amendment to bring government spending into black, "but if I'm going to be president, I'd rather not have one so I can have flexibility."

Dean acknowledged his have-it-both-ways approach, saying with a smile, "So you can put me down as waffling on the balanced budget amendment."

"I'm already down as waffling on that one. I've waffled before. I'll waffle again."

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2003/09/28/ill_mend_iraq_rift_dean_says/

His contention to retain "part" of the missile defense program is a bit misleading, considering Democrats traditionally oppose the star wars defense program:

"Many in the administration . . . argue that deploying an ineffective defense can still be an effective system simply because it would cause uncertainty in the minds of our adversaries. That position is based on the flawed assumption that a president would be willing to gamble our nation's security on a bluff, and that no adversary would be willing or able to call such a bluff. Instead of increasing our security, pursuing a strategy that cannot achieve its goal could leave our nation less secure and our world less stable."

-Senator Tom Dashle
Democrat, South Dakota
May 2, 2001


"To abandon the ABM with the hope to get that capacity somewhere down the line would damage the security interests of the United States."

-Senator Joseph R. Biden, Jr.
Democrat, Delaware
May 2, 2001

"The whole principle of fly before you buy is one we should adhere to. This is placing the political cart before the technical horse."

-Representative John F. Tierney
Democrat, Massachusetts
May 2, 2001


"If you can't shoot down 100 percent of them , you haven't gotten rid of mutually assured destruction. And if you can, you set off an arms race to develop a capacity that can't be touched by a missile defense system."

-Senator John F. Kerry
Democrat, Massachusetts
May 2, 2001

Some of the systems under consideration are "more appropriate to Dreamworks and Steven Spielberg than to actual implementation."

-Representative Neil Abercrombie
Democrat, Hawai'I
May 2, 2001


A Dean administration would be guided by the notion that CTR (Current Cooperative Threat Reduction, the program with Russia and other former Soviet countries to reduce stocks of weapons of mass destruction) and related programs are a more urgent priority than National Missile Defense and would transfer $1 billion per year from the over $8 billion ballistic missile defense budget to CTR and related programs.

Source: Dean for America offiical web site

In reality, the "part" of the missile defense program is $1 billion out of $8 billion, or, just 1/8th of the budget.

If CTR is really more important to our national security - as Dean contends - then why not gut more from Star Wars?

"Democrats fall into two main camps. The first group opposes missile defense because it could mean junking the 1972 Antiballistic Missile Treaty, which they see as the cornerstone of strategic stability. (Already cancelled by Bush). The second favors missile defense, (Howard Dean?) but wants it kept limited - largely because they think ambitious defenses will antagonize Moscow and thereby degrade US security. This second group also worries that spending $100 billion or more on defenses will divert money from programs needed to protect America against other threats."

http://search.csmonitor.com/durable/2001/08/02/p9s1.htm

If Dean is in the second group - and it appears to me he is - and the missile defense program needs to be kept limited - why not gut it further and divide the money among programs like education and Current Cooperative Threat Reduction?

I'd ask Wesley Clark and John Kerry the same questions if they take a similar stance on SDI.

I believe Dennis Kucinich is for the program's entire demise.

[wuushew]

1. This saddens me to no end.

Of course Dean has also said that he would mearly SLOW the rate growth in rate of military spending. So much for his fiscal conservatism.


In fairness aren't most of the other candidates espousing this as well? Kucinich is our only hope.

[blm]

19. Kerry said he'd cut Star Wars and mini-nukes programs.

.

[Chef]

2. Sad

This is sad. Can't they all wean themselves off this treadmill?

[revcarol]

3. Finally, the truth is coming out.

More accurate headline would be "Dean Approves Weaponization of Outer Space!!" but that might appear POLITICAL,oh my, lions and tigers and bears, oh my.

My candidate is DK, too, in the interests of transparency. I am against weaponization of outer space. This is a move directed at China,IMHO. What ever happened to diplomacy and treaties?

[imhotep]

4. he is lying

Dean won't keep any part of star wars.

[wyldwolf]

6. You're saying Dean is lying?

You know what Dean is going to to better than Dean does?

[imhotep]

9. yes

.

[WilliamPitt]

14. Got any backup for that?

He's lying?

[imhotep]

21. no

just an opinion.

[WilliamPitt]

22. Gotcha

Shoot me a PM when you actually get around to posting something of substance.

[imhotep]

25. i know it is shocking

stating an opinion about politics on a political message board.

[Karmadillo]

5. This is the anti-status quo candidate? Seems to me that if the

middle class needs to give up their tax cuts under Dean's economic plan, the military defense industry could stand to give up its welfare check.

[Starpass]

7. 'willing to restrain programs dear to Dems"............

I didn't need to hear that. I was starting to become convinced that Howard "repented" for his damn remarks years ago about ss, medicare, vets benefits, etc. But when I see that phrase about willing to restrain programs dear to Dems that quickly eliminated those thoughts from my mind. I don't need this in the big white house...I already have a bastard like that there called Bush. We need to get back to those Dem programs which this country desperately needs to stay afloat. I have a hard enough time swallowing that statement but it makes me puke that he would rather diddle in the Star Wars fantasy - why?--gee, think Howard might be thinking about denfense contracts instead of people?? I don't want to be 'delivered' to the repukes by a Dem president. I want to hear Howard deny this. But then again Howard said he changed his mind from his remarks several years ago. There's waffling on minor points; and then there is wondering just exactly what this guy would deliver in the end. Too many Americans can't depend on him doing a "gottcha" if elected.

[KaraokeKarlton]

20. Dean isn't big on spending at a higher rate than the rate of growth

When the economy isn't growing there should not be a growth in the rate of spending. That's called fiscal responsibility and it protects the next generations from footing OUR bills. It's proper, conscientious and the moral way to be. We should not be writing checks our ass can't cover. With that being said, one of Dean's hallmarks in Vermont has been his tendency to look at programs closely to make sure they are working the way they are supposed to be working. If they aren't, he will try to fix them so that they do work properly. If they can't be fixed he'll look for innovative new programs that WILL work. He's also very good about cutting waste. He's very "cost effective" in how he does things. Call it frugal, cheap or even a "tightwad"...but Dean is famous for getting more for less. He can't tell people what kinds of defense cuts he might make until he can sit down with all the information and analyze it. I have no doubt he'll make some cuts and move the spending around, but I'm not at all surprised or concerned that he's not making promises. He won't make promises he isn't sure he can keep. If the defense budget can be reduced without putting the security of our country in jeopardy, he will reduce it. A Dean presidency would be the biggest "Spring Cleaning" of government waste ever before seen.

[HFishbine]

8. A more complete Picture (and what's Clark's position?)

"I would continue part of it - the boost phase part, which we are going to need if the North Koreans really do finally develop a nuclear capacity to attack the United States or other countries," he added.

Dean apparently was referring to a system that would hit missiles shortly after launch while they are still in the earth's atmosphere. The system, which requires faster rockets than those developed thus far, is favored by Russia, which objects to the land-based intercept program under way in Alaska.

Dean's position is consistent with that of former President Clinton, who decided before leaving office the United States would not begin construction in Alaska, although research in ground-based interceptor would continue. Some Democrats want to scrap the entire missile-defense program, which costs tens of billions of dollars.

source: http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/bw-elect/2003/sep/26/092603656.html

What's Clark's position on this issue? Any takers?

[wuushew]

10. Clinton's position was R&D only

Your quote indicates Dean would authorize actual deployment.

[stickdog]

16. Where does the quote indicate that?

I have a feeling Dean is leaving himself a lot of wiggle room here.

[HFishbine]

17. "Source?"

"Clinton's position was R&D only"

I provided links for confirmation. Do you have a source for your assertion?

[wyldwolf]

23. .

.

[wyldwolf]

24. Google Bill Clinton Missile Defense

...to see his postition on Star Wars and take your pick of articles.

There is no quote saying from Clinton saying his position was R&D only BUT any number of article suggest it.

Just as I don't need to hear Clinton say he adores women. I just know it to be so.

[WilliamPitt]

15. How about you?

Do some research and start a thread. I'd wonder if he even has a bare-bones policy statement on this put together yet, but you can try. Smart money says too many of the candidates will follow Dean on this. Clinton did.

[HFishbine]

18. Ask

and you shall receive:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=438280

[dolstein]

11. Taking social security off the table -- no thanks

Sorry, but I simply can't take Dean seriously when he rules out (a) raising the retirement age, (b) cutting social security benefits and (c) raising the payroll tax. That's not straight talk. Any politicians who thinks theres a painless way of keeping social security solvent isn't been straight with the American people.

[w4rma]

26. Actually, Dean's stated that he'd raise the payroll tax cap from 85K

if social security needs more money to stay solvent.

[paulk]

12. This means Dean is for junking the ABM treaty

which Bush already junked...

Damn. I wonder what Clark, Kerry, et al, have to say about the ABM treaty?

[stickdog]

13. If you don't like this, then argue you point on his blog or send

him a letter.

Dean thinks incrementally because he's found incremental steps to be the most politically successful.

But you must admit that almost every (perhaps too small) step he proposes is a step in the right direction.

[maggrwaggr]

27. that's all pretty vague. I need more info

Because there's missle defense and then there's missle defense.

The whole space-based missile defense "shield" nonsense needs to be scrapped 100%. If Dean isn't for scrapping this 100% I'll have big problems with that.

But the ground-based stuff might have some actual functionality.

By the way, I like both Dean and Clark.

Dean needs to be REALLY clear here. Or he's gonna lose a lot of people.