[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 10]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 14069]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                 SERIOUS QUESTIONS ON STAR WARS REMAIN

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. GEORGE MILLER

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, July 19, 2001

  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I commend the following 
editorial to my colleagues that ran in the July 18, 2001, edition of 
the Contra Costa Times, a suburban newspaper which serves my 7th 
Congressional district in California. The Contra Costa Times has a 
circulation of 185,000 readers.
  This editorial emphasizes a reality that should not be overlooked; 
the success of the recent missile defense test does nothing to change 
the fundamental arguments against deployment of a national missile 
defense system. Call it NMD, Star Wars II, or whatever you want. It 
still remains a bad idea that promises to divert needed funding toward 
a risky gambit that will certainly worsen our relations with our 
international partners and our own national security.

           [From the Contra Costa Times (CA), July 18, 2001]

                         It Is Still a Bad Idea

       After the U.S. Military shot down a mock intercontinental 
     ballistic missile Saturday night as part of its missile 
     defense plan, a Pentagon spokesman urged everyone not to get 
     too excited about it. ``We've got a long road ahead,'' 
     cautioned Lt. Gen Ronald Kadish, director of the Pentagon's 
     Missile Defense Organization.
       Let us translate that for you: Kadish is saying that the 
     Pentagon intends to spend scads more of the taxpayers' 
     dollars on this hare-brained scheme, a plan that, despite 
     Saturday's apparent success, is unworkable, prohibitively 
     expensive, does incalculable damage to international 
     relations, and threatens to bring back the Cold War.
       On Saturday, a prototype interceptor fired from Kwajalein 
     Atoll in the Marshall Islands struck and destroyed a dummy 
     warhead 140 miles above the Pacific. It was not seduced by a 
     round, reflective decoy balloon sent up with the target. The 
     test cost $100 million. Two previous tests had failed.
       Military backers of the test, in a self-congratulatory 
     mood, were slapping each other on the back after the hit. But 
     the truth is that this test doesn't mean much militarily. The 
     only decoy used for the test was easily identifiable and in 
     the highly unlikely event that an enemy nation were to attack 
     it would use multiple decoys shaped like real warheads.
       Nor should anyone take the cost lightly. The Pentagon plans 
     17 more of these tests in the next 18 months. At $100 million 
     each, you're talking serious money. In a faltering economy, 
     the United States does not have the cash to waste.
       Additionally, continued work on the missile defense system 
     will increase international tensions. Russia already is 
     nervous at the prospect of the United States trying to make 
     itself into the only superpower, and has been making 
     threatening rumbles about building up its own military. As we 
     have said before, these tests torpedo decades of work toward 
     undoing the danger to the planet created by the proliferation 
     of nuclear weapons.
       In any event, the tests are pointless. The so-called rogue 
     nations that the military complex says might attack--North 
     Korea, Iran and Iraq are usually mentioned--are not going to 
     send a missile against the United States or its allies, 
     because they know it would invite nuclear annihilation. The 
     memory of Hiroshima and Nagasaki remain in the world's 
     collective consciousness.
       Finally, these war games, which have the military capering 
     over their computers like teenagers playing ``Space 
     Invaders,'' do not address the way an enemy nation, 
     organization or individuals actually would attack the United 
     States: with weapons they could carry into the country. How 
     about defending us against that?
       We have said it before, and there is no reason to change 
     our position: This so-called missile defense system is a 
     dangerous, costly exercise in foolishness.

     

                          ____________________