Here is one that I really love because I am in California. If you are going to plant a missile next to me give me one that goes up fast and straight to its target not one that will rise half-heartedly for a little while, wobble around and then fall back close to where it was launched.
I want to mention something here. We have entered a new mutated form of Cold war: the Greed War. The neocon unilateralist approach is widening our differences with the world, provoking an escalating arms race and a sprint to establish strategic base locations, a military presence and puppet regimes in those areas of the world that are increasingly seen as vital for the continued growth and prosperity of a country. #msg-1942732
There is an enormous amount of money to be made in a ‘Cold War’ by a privileged few. However, the cost to the citizens of the unlucky countries involved will be staggering and will far surpass and dwarf all that we spend on Iraq. This is extremely important but, alas, it demands looking ahead, so it stays ignored. IMO, –Am
It might have been worse; O’Neill could have had an almanac instead of top secret stuff.
Jan. 9, 2004. 01:00 AM
Canadians aren't missile defence enthusiasts. Nor should we be.
U.S. President George Bush is rushing to install 10 wobbly interceptor rockets in California and Alaska this year, to "shoot down" any missiles North Korea might be crazy enough to launch. But this "Star Wars lite" scheme is more fantasy than fact, as eminent Canadians like Nobel laureate John Polanyi have pointed out.
The cost is real: $20 billion.
Yet the missiles don't work. They most probably will one day, but not now. The U.S. General Accounting Office warns that of 10 technologies the system needs, just two function.
Moreover, the threat has been blown out of proportion. Few countries threaten us. None appears suicidal enough to attack.
Still, the Americans are adamant. Congress has passed a law requiring a shield. And rightly or not, the trauma of 9/11 has added urgency.
Even Bill Clinton, no fan of missile shields, was under the gun to comply. Bush is downright eager.
To all this, Prime Minister Paul Martin might be tempted to say, No thanks. It's not for us. But the downside of opting out is becoming greater than that of opting in. It would alienate Washington, just as Ottawa is trying to improve relations.
Worse, it would invite the breakup of Canada's key strategic alliance.
Bush might give up on the North American Aerospace Defence Command, a joint Canada/U.S. military operation since 1958 that tracks threats to this continent. If Canadians refuse to help track and shoot down missiles, Bush could place both functions solely in U.S. hands.
That would end Canada's privileged access to U.S. strategic thinking, intelligence data and high-tech weaponry. And by shifting the front end of our defence into U.S. hands, it would compromise our sovereignty.
It would also put us out of step with every ally we have.
The entire North Atlantic Treaty Organization has agreed to "examine options for protecting alliance territory, forces and population centres against the full range of missile threats." Even the Russians, who once fiercely objected to missile defence, are climbing aboard.
So if Americans are fantasizing when they dream of a functioning missile shield any time soon, the shield's critics also fantasize when they claim that we can walk away at no cost, or that we invite an arms race by signing on.
Canadians would prefer not to be forced to choose. But given Bush's insistence, we now have to ask ourselves whether the Canada/U.S. alliance is worth risking to oppose a shield that our allies are embracing. Opponents of the shield haven't made a convincing case.
So it's no surprise to learn Martin plans to tell Bush that Ottawa is ready to open talks on joining the scheme, when they meet next week.
Still, before Martin makes a final decision, Parliament must be consulted, and have a healthy debate.
Canadians will want to know whether NORAD will run the system, what it may cost us, and whether radars or interceptor rockets might be based here.
Martin should signal, as well, that Canada will continue pressing the U.S. and other nuclear powers to cut down their arsenals, with a view to eliminating them, and to refrain from placing arms in space.
That much of our arms control policy Martin can and should preserve.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
