kakki wrote: > 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?
It's a boondoggle because the zillions will benefit the defense industry, but not make us any safer > 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? We will still have the nukes. > The two superpowers at the time were both developing > it. If Johnny across the street jumped off the roof, would you? > > > >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? Because it won't work. "Like hitting a bullet with a bullet" If Bush was serious about any of this, he wouldn't be shredding the non-proliferation treaties. Ransy
