America's Vulnerability To A Missile Attack

The same held true for the presidency of the senior George Bush, who was distinctly less enthusiastic about SDI than was his predecessor. Moreover, the elder Bush felt himself bound by the ABM treaty, which he viewed as the cornerstone of our defense policy. President Clinton all but killed the SDI program and only a determined group in the Congress and some enthusiasts at the Pentagon kept it alive.

Now along comes President George W. Bush. He had raised hopes that a missile defense system would at last become a reality. Bush served notice to Russia, the successor state to the collapsed Soviet Union, that the United States is withdrawing from the ABM treaty. The presumed outcome of that initiative, that relations between Russia and the United States would disintegrate, did not take place. Russia accepted the U.S. position, even though it said it disagreed with it.

So everything appeared to be set for actually deploying a missile defense system. The majority of tests conducted with interceptors were successful. The tests showed that the system would work. This is not the massive system envisioned by Reagan who was dealing with a hostile Soviet Union which had thousands of nuclear warheads pointed at the United States. Rather the system to be deployed by the USA now would be aimed at thwarting a single missile launched from a missile base located in a rogue state or from a freighter at sea.

Unfortunately for George W. Bush, Carl Levin (D-MI) took over as Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee from Sen. John Warner (R-VA). Levin is unremittingly hostile to a missile defense system for the USA. He has thrown every possible obstacle in Bush's way, and Bush has not fought for missile defense the way most of us presumed he would. The result is that we are beginning to go backward instead of forward in the deployment of a system that works.

Meanwhile the Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis has produced a study that I wish could be read by every adult in this country. Short of that, I'd settle for mandatory reading by all Members of Congress.

The study is entitled "Scenarios Involving Various U.S. Cities Attacked by Al Qaeda Terrorists with Sea Launched SCUD Nuclear Missiles."

The study involves Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., Norfolk, Va., Miami, Houston, San Diego, Hollywood, San Francisco and Seattle.

In each case, a rationale for the attack from Al Qaeda's point of view is provided. Boston, for instance, is a bastion of liberal western intellectual thought and ideas; science is viewed as greater than religion; critical elements of the U.S. high-tech, military/industrial complex are located there. And the same kind of analysis is given for other cities too. Details of the attack are provided, the tonnage of the warhead, how it was obtained, how it was transported to an area close enough to be effective.

Then the impact of the explosion. Killed immediately would be 125,000 of Boston's 600,000 residents. Another 25% would be injured. Most buildings in a one-mile radius would be destroyed. The majority of buildings in a three mile radius devastated. Fires that are started all over the city would cause another 60,000 dead and 120,000 injured. The study then details the causes of the fatalities.

This is done for all of the strategic cities covered by the study. This study has a chilling effect on anyone who doesn't believe that we are vulnerable to attack. The premise is that we would be attacked by a single SCUD missile, which we know the terrorists already have. Do they have nuclear capability? Experts who calculate threats to this country believe that the terrorists may indeed have nuclear capability based on the fact that nuclear scientists and materials are unaccounted for from the former Soviet Union. This study makes clear just how vulnerable the United States is to a terrorist attack.

I don't know what it will take to turn Congress around. I don't know what will renew a sense of urgency on the part of the Bush Administration to deploy a workable sea based missile defense system. We don't have a moment to spare. If you see your Congressman or Senator during this summer recess, you must raise the issue with him or her. Our very lives may depend on it.

(Paul M. Weyrich is President of the Free Congress Foundation.)

Free Congress Foundation

In the desert storm we witnessed a new stratagey by corporate loyalist who lent there insider knowledge to IRAQ. The paitriot missile defense system worked just fine in downing incomeing missiles. But they were told what to load in the war heads to complement effect on our troops. They know from those who built the defense system how to use there outdated weapons by forming stratiges based on insider info resulting in our troops being exposed. We need some new thinking on the battlefeild to keep ours safe as we can. GOD BLESS OUR SOLDIERS! TAKE CARE OF THOSE WHO ARE EXPOSED!

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.