Austin Bay writes in TCS DAily that we have the a missile defense system, even if thin and still emerging. This is good because a) North Korea and Iran won't really be able to threaten us, and b) they won't be able to threaten our allies, either.
I perceive a few downsides, however:
1. The system isn't flawless. This means that political pressure from the anti-ABM crowd could still dismantle or delay it past the point of usefulness.
2. Even if a robust system is developed, the result could be a strengthening rather than a weakening of the desire to hunt terrorists abroad, a false safety, if you will.
3. It does nothing to defend against a "suitcase-nuke" scenario, which, while it might not be as plausible as it once seemed, is by no means beyond the bounds of plausibility. Having an effective missile defense will, paradoxically, increase rather than decrease the need to stay on top of international terrorists, to hunt them down and damage the states that protect them, even as it potentially saps the will to do so.
Doubtless dKos has the answers to all of these.
No comments:
Post a Comment