Star-Wars Revived

[still life]

It seems to me that, during the Reagan years, a hugely expensive, missile- defence system was touted as the ultimate way to keep North America safe.
There is a resurgeance of interest in this possibility. This interest seems to have been prompted by the Sept 11 attack.
Again, much like the attack on Iraq, Global terrorism seems to have been connected to organized war and the bombs and missiles which may reach our shores.
No missile-defence system would have protected us from the use of commercial aircraft as weapons, and yet the idea of Star-Wars persists. The Patriot missile was less than effective [0%-4% success, according to the investigation, following Gulf War 1] and Raytheon, it's manufacturer is said to be one of the participants in this new surge of interest. Will this approach have any chance of success, or is it just destined to be a money pit with the companies involved getting rich, with little or no benefit, with regard to added safety for us???

[Claude]

The problem with SDI (Strategic Defense Initiative (http://www.bartleby.com/65/st/StratDI.html)) is that it is (as the name says) a purely defensive system, whereas the current US governement seems more interested in offensive possibilities

[still life]

Recent news is that the U.S. is gathering support for a revival of the so-called Star Wars technology, which is dubious at best. The Patriot, which was receiving accolades by the first Bush administration and by the military was not only ineffective in it's "bullet-with-a-bullet" function, but was actually part of the reason that 28 U.S. miltary were killed and scores injured in a scud strike on the barracks, during the first Gulf War, because they trusted the ability of the defensive ability of the missile interceptors.
Raytheon sold the Patriot, again, this Gulf War and it still caused the deaths of seven British military, when it shot down their plane, because it cannot recognize the difference between friend and foe. At first, the British plane was blamed, for not having the correct markings, or indicators. It turned out that the missile defence system was simply firing at a radar blip that it interpreted as "the enemy".the same way, it targetted an American fighter plane. That plane, luckily was able to avoid being hit, when it realized it was being targetted. Unless the technology has changed radically, I don't feel very safe having Raytheon involved in any proposed missile defence sytem, with their record of failure with their last two huge contracts for the Military.

[Jazzmoose]

What are you talking about, still life? The last two systems Raytheon manufactured were highly successful! They made a ton of money! ;)

[still life]

Originally posted by Jazzmoose
What are you talking about, still life? The last two systems Raytheon manufactured were highly successful! They made a ton of money! ;)


If the money they generated for Raytheon is the measure, then you're right.

[3pointdeli]

still life, you're canadian. here in america, profit is the measure of success for everything.

[still life]

That does seem to be the case. But the idea that millions of dollars would be doled out to a defence contracter for a weapon that doesn't do what it's supposed to do seems like a huge scam, at the very least.
You mentioned my being a Canadian. That's true. We have the same blatent waste of public money. We certainly have our share of $2,000.00 toilet seats, etc.
But this isn't just about money. It's about the safety of the citizens being compromised, with the military and the government being part of the scam. Bush 1 knew about the miserable performance of the Patriot and still went to the plant and made a speech, congratulating the workers on the fabulous work they had done, protecting the troops in the first Gulf war with the Patriot. That goes beyond free enterprise, I would think.
Our Prime Minister claims that our joining the U.S. in the development of a missile defense system, with Raytheon and the other players in this endeavor would be a good thing.
Pouring money and trust into a system, even if it were possible to put a huge umbrella over North America, won't protect us from an attack, such as Sept 11. That's not war. That's terrorism and there's no real defense against "small" acts of terrorism, as many countries have already discovered.
Politics and Big Business. Strange bedfellows.

[Jazzmoose]

This particular scam (enriching defense contractors while creating the illusion of benefit for the population) has been a large part of what America has been about since World War II.

[3pointdeli]

>>>That does seem to be the case. But the idea that millions of dollars would be doled out to a defence contracter for a weapon that doesn't do what it's supposed to do seems like a huge scam, at the very least.<<<

of couse it is.

[still life]

So, is there anything that can be done? It seems that a false sense of security is at the very least, dishonest. This is not to mention the huge expenditure, of billions of tax dollars which would be better used elsewhere in the economy. It seems like a high price to pay, both in lives and money, by the citizenry. Already the economy is in the tank, in two short years and running an unprecedented deficit.
With veterens, the poor and the unemployed being short-changed, doesn't anyone care that their tax dollars and their trust are being trampled? Free enterprise is one thing, but outright fraud is something else entirely.

[3pointdeli]

no. there doesn't seem to be anything that can be done. voting obviously doesn't work anymore. what else is there? protest? right, that only works against the dixie chicks.

[still life]

Sadly, I think you're right. We can't believe politicians, which isn't a surprise, but it would seem to me that the surrounding reduced circumstances, domestically would cause regular people to wonder what the hell is happening. There are deep cuts being made in every segment of the economy, with the exception of a magical tax cut, reduced, but still huge, for the already rich. The theory, as it was in the Reagan years, seems to be that it will "trickle down", creating jobs. How many unemployed people will it take to make people realize that something is wrong??
Are we children, who think that the government knows, better than we do, how to run the economy and protect us, if that's actually possible??
Are we afraid to ask questions of our employees, which is who all these clowns, throwing our money away are? If any of us were just flushing billions of dollars, of our company's money, down the toilet, wouldn't we be fired, or jailed, or both??

[3pointdeli]

i don't know what to say. it's really scary. it would take probably ten consecutive non-republican presidencies to repair the damage done in the first half of the current administration.

[still life]

I agree. Yet, here we all are, twisting our sashes, wondering if there is anything that can be done. Standards of honesty and integrety apparantly apply to everyone, even Enron and Worldcom. However, lying about one's intentions, before and after being entrusted with public office seems almost expected.
If the present administration had said they were going to do with the economy and about world affairs, while campaigning, would they be in office? Of course, Sept 11 hadn't happened yet, but the Plan was well established, just waiting for the opportunity to bring it to reality.
Dishonesty about reasons for waging a destructive and expensive war, doesn't seem to be a prerequisite for impeachment. Moral outrage about private matters, lying about them when accused notwithstanding, was something people could relate to. Which affected us more??

[still life]

Major debate going on in Canada's Parliament. The question of whether Canada should sign onto the revived "Missile Defence" system, being proposed by the U.S., supposedly to protect us from attack by hostile nations.
Of course, as I mentioned earlier, and Lloyd Axeworthy, a Canadian politician did today, no missile defense system would protect us from any kind of terrorism at all. It would be impossible to stop anyone who intends to create havok, with any kind of "small" attack, or series of "small attacks". Nobody doubts that it would be a good thing if it were possible to put up a giant umbrella of what amounts to directed landmines and shoot missiles out of the sky. Possible?? Who knows? But, such a program will certainly cost billions and create a project for years to come, successful in producing anything effective or not.

Whether or not Canada pours money into this new program seems to be being decided on the basis of regaining good relations with the U.S. and not any confidence in the project. Canada is being bad-mouthed and penalized for their decision to not participate in the war in Iraq, which we are entitled to do.
This is most troubling, considering the expenditure of such huge amounts on what amounts to a doubtful, but expensive project, to the detriment of regaining some economic stability, given the global economy and the attendant problems we, and other countries, including the U.S. face now.

[3pointdeli]

there's that bush admin. spin at work again. you can only oppose so many idiotic ideas before you are portrayed as anti-american.

[still life]

Originally posted by 3pointdeli
there's that bush admin. spin at work again. you can only oppose so many idiotic ideas before you are portrayed as anti-american.

These days, it seems as if any opposition of any kind, to any hare-brained proposal of policy, is met with accusations of anti-Americanism. It seems to me, to be a dream come true, for this administration to roll over any objections of thinking people, which, far from being anti-American, are part of a responsible governing body. There are SUPPOSED to be dissenting views, a "checks and balances" to bring to light any problems that proposed action by the sitting government may entail. That's why there are provisions for debate. Many, if not most, of the decisions, regarding disbursal of public funds and the changing of the way the law is applied, not to mention creating new law, has been passed through with virtually no opposition. I suspect that the fear of seeming un-American if even the smallest opposition to the actions proposed is creating a dangerous climate for the country. Passing proposed changes in this way makes the perception of our reputed "free country" more like a country which discourages naturally occurring valid objections. Voicing those objections, and dealing with them, for a mutually agreed-on result has always been what set the West apart, from repressive regimes. Did we lose that as a result of Sept 11 too??
Just how much should the American public trust their government?? Bully tactics seem to be the order of the day.

[Jazzmoose]

Welcome to the world that Newt made, still life. We're going to be dealing the crap from Gingrich's successful approach to politics for a long time. The slash-and-burn, slander your opponent schtick works, and until it doesn't, we're going to be stuck with it.

[still life]

The climate in the U.S. and, by extension, here is really frightening. The reputation, world-wide, of the American people has always been of a courageous citizenry who didn't stand for any crap. Now, the sheep-like acceptance of anything their government dishes out is very "disappointing", to use your Ambassador to Canada's expression, when chiding us, for not following, lock-step into an ill-advised war. It remains to be seen how our industries and trade will be affected by our decision not to fall into line. What happened to the feisty spirit of America? What happened to the freedom that America has always represented? Has everyone lost their, well, their balls? So sad.