- The Washington Times - Sunday, December 20, 2009


Lawrence J. Korb, Sean Duggan and Laura Conley complain that the Obama administration has yet to set forth an overall national-security strategy that could guide U.S. policy (“Overall strategy is needed,” Opinion, Thursday).

However, the writers apparently see nothing wrong in concluding, on the one hand, that we are not spending enough of the taxpayers’ money implementing Kyoto and Copenhagen and, on the other hand, that we are spending too much money on missile defense. For the United States to implement the global-warming agenda, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, would require $22 trillion between 2010-2100, to say nothing of the trillions of dollars transferred to the Third World to pay for our “carbon deficit.”

As for missile defense, the writers describe it as a “single program,” even though it consists of more than 20 separate acquisition efforts, including radars, sensors, missile defenses and advanced research projects. National missile defense, which is designed to protect the continental United States, now costs less than $2 billion annually.

Even if fully implemented, the U.S. Kyoto policy would reduce global temperatures by less than 0.2 of a degree Celsius, which would be meaningless. The latest Iranian ballistic-missile launch, coupled with repeated evidence of Iran’s nuclear-weapons development, illustrates a threat from which our national missile defenses - some one-10,000th of the cost of Kyoto - are protecting America.



GeoStrategic Analysis


Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times is switching its third-party commenting system from Disqus to Spot.IM. You will need to either create an account with Spot.im or if you wish to use your Disqus account look under the Conversation for the link "Have a Disqus Account?". Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More

Click to Hide