[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 140 (Thursday, October 8, 1998)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1942]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    THREAT OF NUCLEAR MISSILE ATTACK

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. DOUG BEREUTER

                              of nebraska

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, October 7, 1998

  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member would ask his colleagues to 
consider carefully the following editorial from the October 6, 1998, 
edition of the Norfolk Daily News, entitled ``Defense System is Needed 
in U.S.''

                [From Norfolk Daily News, Oct. 6, 1998]

                    Defense System is Needed in U.S.


  1972 Treaty Doesn't Bar United States From Developing Anti-Missile 
                                Weapons

       A bipartisan commission headed by Donald Rumsfield, a 
     former U.S. Secretary of Defense, recently concluded that 
     nuclear missiles from rogue nations would strike American 
     cities with ``little or no warning'' in just a matter of a 
     few years.
       At the same time, U.S. intelligence agencies are saying 
     that the United States has nothing to worry about from such 
     missile attacks.
       What is one to believe?
       The Heritage Foundation, a Washington-based public policy 
     research institute, thinks Americans would be wise to heed 
     the findings of the Rumsfield commission and take the steps 
     necessary to ensure the United States has an effective 
     missile defense system. We agree.
       The Soviet Union may be no more, but the threat of a 
     missile attack on the United States is as real as ever. China 
     is a bona fide nuclear power with missiles already aimed at 
     the United States, and India and Pakistan have detonated 
     nuclear devices as well. In addition, North Korea and Iran 
     have been developing missiles that soon may be able to reach 
     the United States. And a number of countries already possess 
     missiles capable of striking U.S. allies and troops stationed 
     abroad.
       All of this prompts Edwin Feulner, president of Heritage 
     Foundation, to make two points:
       1. Those who argue that the 1972 ABM Treaty bars the United 
     States from having a military defense system are mistaken. 
     The treaty, which the United States signed with the Soviet 
     Union, was designed to prevent the deployment of missile 
     defenses. But the Soviet Union no longer exists. That makes 
     the treaty null and void.
       2. A missile defense system doesn't need to spur flashbacks 
     of Star Wars and President Reagan's Strategic Defense 
     Initiative that was proposed in 1983. Since then, defense 
     experts have been able to devise an effective missile defense 
     system that could be operational simply by upgrading the U.S. 
     Navy's existing fleet of guided-missile cruisers.
       Those two points should help further the cause of 
     establishing a missile defense system. For if even one 
     nuclear missile reached the United States, millions could die 
     within minutes. As Mr. Feulner has said, building such a 
     defense system is not just a defense consideration, it's a 
     moral imperative.

     

                          ____________________