About Me

Name: EWRoss
Email: EWR@EWRoss.com Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

MISSILE DEFENSE THAT "WORKS"

Despite the great progress the US has made in recent years in missile defense (MD) the debate over its use and effectiveness continues. The roots of that debate remain firmly planted in Cold-War thinking. Mutually assured destruction (MAD) doesn't maintain stability if one side has a MD advantage. Therefore, countries like the Russia and China will always oppose US MD and demand concessions, like Russia's demand that the US cancel the Czech-Poland MD program, as a precondition for arms control and other strategic negotiations.

The proliferation of short, medium, and long-range ballistic missiles by countries like North Korea and Iran, however, make MD an absolute necessity for the United States--North Korea and Iran pose no threat to Russia and China. No one said it better than President George W. Bush in a speech at the West Point Military Academy in 2002. "The gravest danger to freedom lies at the crossroads of radicalism and technology. When the spread of chemical and biological and nuclear weapons, along with ballistic missile technology--when that occurs, even weak states and small groups could attain a catastrophic power to strike great nations. Our enemies have declared this very intention, and have been caught seeking these terrible weapons."

President Obama frequently states that he favors MD that "works." Most people interpret "works" to mean can it reliably intercept missiles. Works can also mean does it maintain stability between the US, Russia, and China. Democrats have a long history of opposing MD on that basis. Understanding this logic is key to understanding President Obama's cancellation of the Czech-Poland program.

MD that does not provide a capability to intercept long-range and intercontinental ballistic missiles is woefully inadequate, and the US must, therefore, develop and deploy such systems. It cannot allow Russia, China, or domestic opponents to dissuade it from that course.

Read my weekly columns and my current sidebar at http://ewross.com

Read Previous EWRoss at http://ewross.com/Sidebar.htm

Read Previous EWRoss weekly columns at http://ewross.com/archive.htm
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

REGIME CHANGE

Just various pundits have observed this week, it’s difficult to see how President Obama can continue with his policy of engaging the senior Iranian leadership in direct discussions and negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program after the brutal crackdown on its own people. Any pretense of legitimacy the Government of Iran had and any hope Obama had of broad support for direct negotiations with Iran went out the window when it started shooting its own people.

It appears that President Obama is left with two options. He can do nothing and perhaps wait for Israel to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities, involving us, whether we like it or not, in a very dangerous situation. Or he can work with our friends and allies to impose strict sanctions on Iran while supporting the Iranian popular movement for regime change. The US is far more likely to garner support for such a policy from our European partners now than we have in the past. China and Russia, countries that on occasion shoot their own people when the get out of line, aren’t going to provide much help. The US will have to work outside the UN to achieve any success.
 
The popular uprising in Iran was a defining moment in the history of that ancient land. If it ultimately succeeds, and I believe it will, it also will be a defining moment in the history of the Middle East and the World. President Obama should stop rejecting everything and anything associated with President George W. Bush and his administration. On Iran, Bush had it right. A government in Iran that represents the people who took to the streets over the past two weeks is far more likely to negotiate in good faith with the US over Iran’s nuclear aspirations than the existing theocracy. The sooner it comes to power the safer we’ll all be.
 
Read my weekly columns and my current daily comment at http://ewross.com
Previous EWRoss Dailies http://ewross.com/EWRoss_Daily.htm
Previous EWRoss weekly columns http://ewross.com/archive.htm
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

HARD TIMES SEMINAL CHOICES

Tomorrow, Americans will elect either John McCain or Barack Obama to lead us through hard times. After the election, when the excitement and promises of the campaign give way to reality, seminal choices will continue to confront America. Important questions that affect America's future will still have to be answered.
 
Read my November 3, 2008 Column at http://www.ewross.com/Hard_Times_Seminal_Choices.htm
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »