Dangers in U.S. Expanding Missile Defense Program

Dangers in U.S. Expanding Missile Defense Program

by Arn Specter (Twitter and Op Ed News)
September 29, 2009

The following article on US Missile Defense is one of many
by the prolific and comprehensive writer/researcher
Rick Rozoff. In looking through his website or Yahoo Group,
Stop NATO one sees hundreds of well written articles on the
escalating U.S. Military efforts at home and abroad, while
showing us the many dangers we are incurring by these
expansions. The geopolitical concerns of many nations in
Europe, the Middle East and Asia are discussed as well as
the current plans for more mobile missile systems on the
waters of the Middle East and Europe by U.S. Navy ships,
some replacing the recent abandoning of missile defense in
Eastern Europe (Poland and the Czech Republic).

One very important point Mr. Rozoff makes is that Pres.Obama
contradicts himself when he calls for reductions in nuclear weapons while, at the same time, calls for expansion of U.S.
Missile Defense Systems (whose missiles carry nuclear warheads). This position by the President (and that of the
military and Defense Secretary Robert Gates and the head
of the U.S. Missile Defense Agency, Gen. Patrick O'Reilly)
need to be challenged. We need much more diplomacy in
troubled regions of the world with negotiations and agreements
ensuring peace and mutual support between nations.

Too the U.S. Military expansions need to be taken extremely
seriously as those in charge seek even more lethal and power
laden arsenals and strategies worldwide. For example, Secretary Gates wants to revitalize a program that would replace our current nuclear weapons with bigger and more powerful warheads.
(this is in direct contradiction to the President's claim and desire
for reductions of nuclear capabilities, stockpiles and ability to strike.) Presently START talks are ongoing with Russia in these regards.

Also, Gen. O'Reilly issued forth his desire for the U.S. to not only continue to expand the missile defense systems programs but to make "first strike" options a new rule or guideline for those in charge of missile defense weapons and strategies. This would mean, in effect, if a commander "felt" that an enemy was doing something suspicious or threatening then the U.S. had the right to attack them, even with a nuclear warhead missile. The danger of such a directive cannot be measured!

The disarmament, nuclear nonproliferation, anti-war, and peacemaking activist communities need to take these concerns very seriously at this time and in the near future. Missile Defense is now working with a budget of close to $8 Billion and the Military overall is working with the largest budget in the history of the world, and about as much as all other nations in the world combined!

Therefore, we need to press the President and those in Congress who consider and vote the appropriations for military spending to consider reductions instead of increases in military spending in the years ahead.

A change in foreign policy which first of all ends the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan then concentrates much more on diplomacy and partner building with other nations while greatly reducing the military budgets and programs,can have a chance to follow. Developing a peace economy instead of a war economy is one of our greatest challenges ahead in the coming years.

I suggest you look over this penetrating article by Rick Rozoff and read some of his other articles in order to become much better educated to the quickly growing militarization by the U.S. worldwide. This increase of military might recently showed the U.S. to be the world's biggest arms dealer, a distinction not less deadly in some respects to the world's biggest drug dealer; as bullets are as dangerous as drugs in delivering their mission of injury and death to the intended victim.

Too, the U.S. can bolster it's new image of a more balanced war-peace economy by joining forces with many other nations in signing International Treaties, such as, The Land Mine Treaty, The Cluster Munitions Ban Treaty and the Small Arms Trade Treaty, all avoided up to this point in order to allow the Military Industrial Complex to continue to maintain and increase their business and profit making worldwide. I say these things without tongue and cheek as the U.S. is the largest warmaker on Earth and needs to be held accountable and it's foreign policy reversed as soon as possible if we are to have a safe and secure world in the future.

Arn Specter, Phila. (Twitter and Op Ed News)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dangerous Missile Battle In Space Over Europe: Fifth Act In U.S. Missile Shield Drama