Missile Defense Essay, Research Paper
“ Star Wars ” was an thought for the hereafter. It was an thought that was set into gesture by Ronald Regan and at the clip seemed about like an impossibleness. That hereafter is now. Now what seemed impossible is possible with today ’ s engineering and the engineering to come in the approaching old ages. George W. Bush is rapidly picking up with where Ronald Regan left off. There is a program in affect for a Missile Defense System. This system will be capable of hiting down ballistic missiles, that have been launched by another province or histrion, that are directed at the United States or its Alliess. However, with this program for Missile Defense that George W. Bush is forcing for comes great international ill will. Many of the other provinces are inquiring the US to halt this undertaking. However though this resistance the President is forcing on, non leting other counties to oblige him to alter his head. The Missile Defense undertaking nevertheless controversial it may be on the national and international graduated table must travel on for the interest of the security of our state.
Ever since 1950 ’ s the United States has been seeking to prosecute a ballistic missile system. In that clip with the limited engineering that was possessed it was non possible to bring forth an effectual defence missile system. However now engineering is available to gives to several different options to a missile defence. To understand with these options are we must foremost understand what missile defence is. Right now the United States is presently developing several constituents for a missile defence system. The thought this system is to take out in coming ballistic missiles. This system is used to protect the United States and its Alliess from ballistic missiles launched by other provinces or terrorist groups. There are three types missile defence that United States is presently working on to support America and its Alliess. The first of these is a ground-based system. This system is called the ground-based interceptor. Plans are already in action have them built in the North Dakota in Alaska. The National Missile Defense is heading this system up. The Ground-Based Interceptors ’ , or GBI mission is to stop incoming ballistic missiles outside the Earth ’ s atmosphere and destruct them entirely by the impact of the missile. The GBI will transport no explosives on it of any sort. It will take out the ballistic missile entirely by its velocity. Land infrared optical masers and infinite orbiters will direct it. The following thought that has been proposed is a optical maser system. For this system the authorities has contracted a private company called TRW Inc. the end of this company is to bring forth a tactical high-energy optical maser, or THEL. The ground many people think that this will be more effectual in protecting America and its Alliess is due to its effectivity against short-range arms. Theater threats-short scope sail missiles that do non go forth the Earth ’ s atmosphere can non be shot down by a GBI. However, the THEL can hit down short-range arms every bit good as medium -range. This was scene in 1996 when a THEL paradigm shooting down a short-range projectile in flight on its first attempt. Equally good as working on THEL, TRW Inc. is working with the U.S. Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center in order to make a orbiter optical maser system. This system will be capable of taking out intercontinental ballistic missiles. . The 3rd option and possibly the most feasible one is one of a nomadic missile defence system. This system will be attached to either pigboats or battlewagons. The system will be similar to the GBI, nevertheless it will be able to hit missiles down over international Waterss before they even approach American dirt. One of the inquiries on many people ’ s heads now is in visible radiation of the events of September 11th what good it is a missile defence system. Many people longer see the demand for any of these three types of missile defences. Since the prostration of the Soviet Union and the terminal of the Cold War at that place seems to be no menace of a monolithic new atomic onslaught against United States or its Alliess. So the existent inquiry is now why construct this defence system. Who are we supporting against?
The menace against the United States is no longer a menace from any world power or any of the first universe states. The menace of ballistic missiles is now thought to be from the Third World nations, or “ Rouge States. ” in a statement given by the Deputy Secretary of Defense, Paul D. Wolffowitz, to the Senate of the Armed Service Committee, he said “ Imagine, if you will, the following scenario: A knave province with a immensely inferior military, bu
T armed with ballistic missiles and arms of mass devastation, commits an act of aggression against a adjacent state. As President Bush sends U.S. forces into theatre to react, the country`s genocidal dictator threatens our Alliess and deployed forces with ballistic missile onslaught. Suddenly, about without warning, missiles rain down on our military personnels, and lb into the dumbly populated residential vicinities of allied capitals. Panic breaks out. Sirens wail, as deliverance crews in protective cogwheel race to seek the debris for organic structures and hotfoot the injured to infirmaries. Reporters, muttering through their gas masks, effort to depict the devastation, as images of the slaughter are outright broadcast across the universe. Mr. Chairman, the scene I have described is non science fiction. It is non a future struggle scenario dreamed up by originative Pentagon contrivers. It is a description of events that took topographic point ten old ages ago – during the Persian Gulf War. ” As mentioned earlier are a menace is no longer against a world power or a individual State it is once more, it is against rouge provinces or fundamentalist groups. In a address given by President Bush to this to the pupils and module at the National Defense University, he stated, ” Unlike the Cold War, today’s most pressing menace stems non from 1000s of ballistic missiles in the Soviet custodies, but from a little figure of missiles in the custodies of these provinces, provinces for whom panic and blackmail are a manner of life. They seek arms of mass devastation to intimidate their neighbours, and to maintain the United States and other responsible states from assisting Alliess and friends in strategic parts of the universe. Just because on September 11th the terrorist did non utilize ballistic missiles does non intend that they will non in the hereafter. By implementing the defence missile system this is an act of disincentive. The defence missile system is non meant to be hostile at all. It is meant to the security and defence of our state and our Alliess. It is meant as a defence against fundamentalist groups or rouge provinces. It is besides it defence against other states such as China. China may hold already 300 + atomic arms deployed on intercontinental ballistic missiles. On September 2, 1999 competition fired an ICBM that consisted of a 5,000 myocardial infarction. scope. It is besides working on an ICBM that would be capable of firing 7,500 myocardial infarction, and being able to be deployed on a pigboat. China has used these ICBM is every bit purchase in covering with Taiwan. China is a friend of United States, but besides it is seen as a possible menace. Another friend but possible menace United States is Russia. It is the fact that Russia has over 6000 atomic payloads attached to intercontinental ballistic missiles, as of July 1999. This is a existent menace the United States does non desire to overlook. The fact that there are these arms in Russia and that Russia is still unstable America…
The remainder of the paper is available free of charge to our registered users. The enrollment procedure merely couldn ’ t be easier. Log in or registry now. It is all free! 957
ACU Homepage. “ A New attack of Deterrence ”
An Update by the Missile Defense Study Team ( ” Team B ” ) “ Defending America: Ending America ’ s Vulnerability to Attack. ” Heritage Foundation.
hypertext transfer protocol: //www.heritage.org/library/categories/natsec/bg1074.html
Baker Spring and James H. Anderson Ph.D. “ Missile Defense: Ending America ’ s
Vulnerability. ” Heritage Foundation.
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization home page “ Threat. ”
Center for Defense Information Homepage “ A Brief History of Ballistic Missile Defense ”
Jeffrey, Terence P. Human Events, 05/07/2001, Vol. 57 Issue 17, p1, 2p, 2bw
John Deutch, Harold Brown, and John P. White. “ National Missile Defense: Is There
Another Way? ” Foreign Policy.
National Missile Defense Homepage. June 27, 2000
Newhouse, John. “ The Missile Defense Argument: To Deploy or non to Deploy. ”
Foreign Affairs, Jul/Aug2001, Vol. 80 Issue 4, p97, 13p
Nuclear Age Peace Foundation home page. “ A Russian Position on National Defense. ” Alla
Nuclear Age Peace Foundation home page. “ China ’ s Concern Over National Missile Defense ”
Dingli Shen. hypertext transfer protocol: //www.wagingpeace.org/
Paul D. Wolfouitz. FDCH Congressional Testimony. “ Ballistic Missile Defense
TRW Inc. Homepage
World Missile Chart.