Ransy wrote: > While research roots may reach into the 1970's, it was, of course > Reagan who aggressively lobbied for this multimillion dollar > boondoggle.
Why is it a boondoggle? Isn't it better to have a non-nuclear defensive shield in place than a nuclear one which was the defensive shield option set up prior to that time? The two superpowers at the time were both developing it. >And even though Bush is busy pushing the plan > now, it was Clinton who took it out of mothballs and revived it. > In the debates Gore was in favor of it, too. Well, we've all invested our taxpayer dollars in it for over thirty years so why not get it up and running rather than mothball it? Kakki
