NEWS TALK RADIO Our Hosts
Powered by: Townhall.com
Sign Up
Wednesday, August 23, 2006
Austin Bay :: Townhall.com Columnist
Ballistic missile defense in an era of terrorism
by Austin Bay
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Who is the bigger buffoon? Roland Burris or Harry Reid?

North Korea's July missile volley raised legitimate concern about American vulnerability to ballistic missile and cruise missile attack. Hezbollah's rocket barrage of Israel demonstrated that terrorist organizations (non-state actors) can acquire and use missile systems.

The next step, for both North Korea and Hezbollah, is adding a weapon of mass destruction (WMD) -- most likely a warhead carrying either nukes or nerve gas.

The longer-range rockets Hezbollah used (for example, Russian FROG-7 variants) can be classified as short-range or "battlefield" ballistic missiles. With range exceeding 100 hundred kilometers, these missiles can strike well beyond the frontline.

There is good news. The United States isn't completely vulnerable. It possesses a nascent, "thin shield" ballistic missile defense.

The defense consists of bits and pieces of tactical and theater-level anti-missile programs supported by a dozen or so long-range missiles positioned in Alaska and Hawaii.

This defense has layers. The Patriot PAC-3 is designed for short-range, "point-target defense. The Patriot PAC-3 is a completely different missile from the Gulf War's Patriot PAC-2. The PAC-2 was an "enhanced" and "upgraded" anti-aircraft missile. The PAC-3 is a genuine anti-ballistic missile (ABM).

The Army's THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Air Defense) missile and the Navy's Standard-2 and Standard-3 missiles extend the "anti-missile umbrella." The Navy systems are particularly useful. They can be deployed on Aegis cruisers and destroyers. The Navy systems can quickly place anti-missile firepower in the Persian Gulf (to thwart a shot from Iran) or the Sea of Japan (to intercept a North Korean launch).

The Standard-3 missile had a highly successful missile test in June. In a July test at the Army's White Sands range, a THAAD intercepted a SCUD-type ballistic missile.

The nascent defense, however, is an inadequate defense -- I don't think that's a debatable point.

Yet it is a defense in being and a defensive system in the process of expansion. Though limited and frail, it demonstrated political utility in July when North Korea launched its missile volley. What do I mean by that? Japan -- a threatened ally -- asked for Patriot PAC-3s to bolster its defense. The United States agreed to provide them.

We also have a new U.S.-Japanese missile monitoring station in Japan, activated earlier this year. Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Austin Bay Austin Bay is author of three novels. His third novel, The Wrong Side of Brightness, was published by Putnam/Jove in June 2003. He has also co-authored four non-fiction books, to include A Quick and Dirty Guide to War: Third Edition (with James Dunnigan, Morrow, 1996).
 
Be the first to read Austin Bay's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

©Creators Syndicate
Subject: China
You forget that China is the remaining communist power (there are other commmunist states.) They are not our friend. We do business with them as we can. Creeping market capitalism and the aging and death of their leaders might solve the China problem for us eventually, but I am not willing to bet on it. Only when what we propose is seen by them as in their interests are they willing to go along with us otherwise. This is not unusual among nations throughout history.

They are an adversary, or at best a rival. Diplomacy can only do so much. A bit of "peace through strength" or what used to be called "gun-boat diplomacy" is what is otherwise required to get them to "work" with us. "Diplomatic failure" does not mean that we did something wrong or failed to do something. This is an elitist illusion. Not every deal can be made! Or at least, not on terms that are acceptable.

Who's in charge.
If we had credible relations with our biggest trading partner we would not have this problem. China holds the cards in both North Korea and Iran. We are such buffoons when it comes to diplomacy we have ticked off the Chinese and they sit back and laugh at our efforts to control things. Oh, and they hold the cards on our economy too so we should be a bit more careful and keep a gag in Cheney's mouth.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Keep up-to-date with your local Chicago WIND community.
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.