Missile Defense not, President Obama is "unproven."

We currently have two dangers on the horizon: Iran may go nuclear and North Korea may develop a reliable missile capable of reaching the west coast. And what strong words does the United States Government have for such problems? Our Secretary of State calls such actions “unhelpful.” If that is not the understatement of the nuclear age I do not know what is!

To test its intentions, I submitted a detailed proposal to Foreign Ministry nuclear negotiator Li Gun for a "grand bargain" in advance of a visit to Pyongyang last month. North Korea, I suggested, would surrender to the International Atomic Energy Agency the 68 pounds of plutonium it has already declared in denuclearization negotiations. In return, the United States would conclude a peace treaty formally ending the Korean War, normalize diplomatic and economic relations, put food and energy aid on a long-term basis, and support large-scale multilateral credits for rehabilitation of North Korea's economic infrastructure.

The North's rebuff was categorical and explicit. Its declared plutonium has "already been weaponized," I was told repeatedly during 10 hours of discussions.

That was to be expected. The North feels compelled to compete on the global stage in the nuclear realm. My problem comes in the logic people place behind arguments, from the same article:

The strongest argument for this approach is that the United States has nothing to fear from a nuclear North Korea. Pyongyang developed nuclear weapons for defensive reasons, to counter a feared U.S. preemptive strike, and U.S. nuclear capabilities in the Pacific will deter any potential nuclear threat from the North.

Really? So let me get this right you are going to hedge your bets on a regime that has spat in the face of the United States and United Nations time after time and are notorious for NOT keeping their word. That is insanity! If you are going to do that why not go ahead and push for missile defense? If the conclusion is they only have the possibility of 4 warheads, our defense “shield” would not compete against the USSR but it would do just fine against those.

As for the unproven part President Obama:

On December 5, the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) performed a successful intercept test of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) missile defense interceptor. The GMD interceptor destroyed an incoming ballistic missile launched out of Kodiak, Alaska, in space over the Pacific Ocean. President-elect Barack Obama has stated that he will cut investments in "unproven" missile defense systems. His statement implies that the missile defense program's interceptor systems rely on unproven technology. The December 5 test, along with other MDA tests, demonstrates that the implication behind this statement is inaccurate.

When it all boils down…it comes to the so called “wasted money” defense. Well you cannot use the “unproven” BS with me, and second the idea that it is too expensive…

The White House has asked the Pentagon to cut nearly $2 billion, or up to roughly 20 percent, from missile defense in its fiscal 2010 budget, a prominent advocate of the costliest U.S. weapons development effort said on Friday.

Farming Broadband grants to rural communities
$2 BILLION
Food 13% increase in food stamp payments
$20 BILLION
Commerce Grants to provide wireless and broadband infrastructure to communities, including public computer centers and sustainable adoption of broadband service
$4.3 BILLION
Justice Grants to state and local law enforcement to hire extra police officers
$1 BILLION
Science National Science Foundation research
$2.5 BILLION
Environment Flood control and water management construction, regulation and investigations
$4.1 BILLION
Energy Home weatherization grants to low and middle-income families
$5 BILLION
Energy Advanced batteries manufacturing grants
$2 BILLION
Energy Research and development of renewable and efficient energy technology
$2.5 BILLION
Energy Fossil energy research and development
$1 BILLION
Energy Grants for industrial carbon capture and energy efficiency improvement projects
$1 BILLION
Energy Physics research including high-energy physics, nuclear physics and fusion energy sciences
$1.6 BILLION
Energy Money for federal power marketing administrations in electric power transmission systems
$6.5 BILLION

Environment & Energy $50.8 BILLION

Government Construction, repair and energy alterations to federal buildings and facilities
$5.5 BILLION
Labor Grants to states for youth training, including summer jobs
$1.2 BILLION
Labor Grants to states for dislocated worker employment and training activities
$1.3 BILLION
Health and services National Institutes of Health biomedical research
$9.5 BILLION
Health and services Funding for research comparing effectiveness of treatments funded by Medicare, Medicaid and SCHIP
$1.1 BILLION
Health and services Grants to states for childcare services for low-income working parents
$2 BILLION
Transportation Grants for airport improvements
$1,100
Transportation Grants for capital investments in designated high-speed rail corridors
$8 BILLION
Housing Repairs and modernization of public housing projects
$4 BILLION
Housing Energy efficiency retrogrades to low-income housing, including new insulation, windows and furnaces
$2.3 BILLION
Individual aid Two-year extension of program providing income support and training benefits for workers who lose their jobs because of outsourcing overseas
$1.6 BILLION

Excuse me, but all of that from one stimulus bill and you want to cut $2b from missile defense because it has not been “proven” enough for you? President Obama you are cutting as much from MDA as you are willing to spend to make sure people have broadband? $8b to make sure we have high-speed trains, but hey that pesky shooting down nukes thing…who cares cause we will be able to travel at warp speed on a train right in to Union Station and the awaiting mushroom cloud.

Overboard? Ok, yes but it makes my point that as I go through the stimulus bill I see a LOT of money thrown at “research” and/or “development.” President Obama why are you willing to spend twice as much as you want to cut from MDA, on “investigating floods” and “repairing public housing”? At least in the past when the argument was over a few billion dollars towards MDA most of the spending was more reasonable, even on the left. President Obama, you shoved forward a partisan $800 BILLION SPENDING BILL, yet want to cut a measly $2 BILLION from MDA, 20% of the MDA budget?

At a time when missile defense is making great strides this President may hamstring the entire program enough to make it “unproven.”

President Obama, it is said you can be anything you want. It was never “proven” a black man could be POTUS. Why did you not give up on the “research and development” of that “unproven” idea?

Previous Missile Defense, please read up: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6