• Front page
• Receive this content on your RSS reader

By U.S. Rep. Doug Lamborn

When I took office as a new congressman this past January, the words of the oath weighed heavily on me. Elected officials have a sworn duty, as the Constitution says, to “provide for the common defense.” Yet I have grown increasingly concerned that the United States, despite much good work in the past five years, remains in large part undefended against ballistic missile attack.

What is more, while we are not currently on track to field the necessary defenses during this administration, potential funding cuts by Democrats would set us back even further. North Korea defiantly staged missile tests last July 4. China recently shot down one of its own satellites. Iran is in the headlines daily with its efforts to build or buy nuclear warheads and the missiles to deliver them. The EMP threat — a single, massive electromagnetic pulse that could disable all our computers and communications through a nuclear detonation in near space — is a matter of record from Congress’ own commission several years ago. Yet our homeland is still virtually unprotected against our enemies. How did this come about?

In the 1980s, President Reagan began the Strategic Defense Initiative, which resulted in a number of studies, but, ultimately, no deployments.

In 1999 the Congress passed by a veto-proof margin an act declaring it U.S. policy to deploy missile defenses to protect against limited attacks, whether accidental, unauthorized or deliberate. But although President Clinton signed the bill into law, for years no deployments would in fact take place. The old Cold War approach of mutually assured destruction remained largely intact.

In June 2002, under President George W. Bush, the United States withdrew from the rigid and outdated ABM Treaty. A few initial deployments in Alaska and California began by 2004. To date, 17 interceptors have now been put into silos at Forts Greeley and Vandenberg. Upgrades to our proven Aegis sea-based interceptors have also taken place. Both sea- and land-based systems have had impressive testing in recent years, so we know we have the capability.

However, a serious missile threat does not come just from a would-be enemy’s intercontinental capability. A Scud or Shahab missile armed with a weapon of mass destruction and launched off the East Coast from a ship could reach one of our cities within 20 minutes. The technology for such short-range ship-launched missiles is already within the hands of many countries, including both Iran and North Korea. Even if our strategy is to prevent only limited strikes from a rogue nation, rather than defend against Russia or China, we are not doing what we are capable of doing.

To the extent that the Missile Defense Agency has plans to develop and deploy either coastal or space-based defenses, they appear to have been pushed five or more years into the future, which might as well be a lifetime in politics.

The president’s budget for missile defense is $8.9 billion, but Democrats appear intent on slashing it. Under Democratic leadership $764 million was removed from the top line, thus delaying the current long-range planning further. The strategic defense of the country is far too important to be left to a long-range plan, as the president proposes, much less a plan with wholesale cuts as some Democrats propose.

The United States cannot afford to be without defenses for our citizens and our cities, should our best efforts at diplomacy and counterproliferation fail. Voices must be raised — and I intend to be one of the loudest — calling upon members of Congress and the administration, and upon those running for office in 2008, to examine seriously the missile threat to the United States and what is being done to address it. Fighting the war on terrorism should include serious and urgent attention to defending against missile attack. All of us who have sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution can do no less.

Doug Lamborn, a first-term Republican, represents Colorado’s 5th Congressional District in the U.S. House of Representatives.

READER COMMENTS

xmhza xwjralg pcbdoa kzvfsuryn rbwjvh vzfelaso glcrhq

Once nukes begin exploding in the atmosphere, any ability to detect other incoming warheads that might be possible under perfect conditions will be destroyed along with the rest of us. Lamborn is quite literally insane. God save us from those like him who would "protect us."

Idiot. Attacking Lamborn's military service or lack thereof is irrelevant to the issues raised. Remember, Nixon served in the Navy as did Carter - so that shows there no real guarantee that military service produces excellence (I'm a veteran myself, and I can say I've met heroes and I've met trash while I was serving).

Read here for the effects of a single 10KT hit on the port of Los Angeles.

www.californiaconnected.org/newsroom/archives/172

As someone pointed out, that is via a ship in the harbor. A risky venture if random inspections offshore get lucky. But one that we need to fix- spend on port security NOW.

For North Korea, a better way, nearly untraceable is to use a cargo ship, set the missile and TEL up on the deck (stored in containers beforehand on deck), and launch from off shore in international waters. You can rig the launcher for a Nodong on the deck of a freighter and launch it without too much sophistication. Mobile missle technology has been around for decades.

As for proven capability, the SM3's and THAAD segments have successfully intercepted mutliple targets, so they can be deployed if we had enough platforms for them.

As for the cost, I'm amused to see that you are so cheap with lives that you don't care enough to protect them from nuclear attack.

As for the other issues - dead on. Port Security need to be put in as does border security. The current amnesty bullcrap needs to be ditched - security first. Secure and control the border against unregulated entry. (As for the illegals, thats not relevant, only the control of the border is).

And stop the crap that Bush is doing trying to send troops to war and the nation to walmart. If we are going to go to war,then get the nation to pony up some sacrifices. War bonds, and an extra tax to pay for it. Tell the American people WHY we are doing it, and WHAT it will cost, then put the taxes out there to pay for it. Stop the deception - and start doing the job of protecting the nation.

The only winners under Mr. Lanborn's proposal are the defense contractors, who will happily spend billions in taxpayer money to develop a system that may or may not actually work. And when it is finished (if it is ever finished, that is), our enemies will simply sail a cargo ship into a busy American port and detonate the nukes they have hidden aboard. The President's budget for missile defense is $8.9 billion- his budget for protecting infrastructure is $600 million- his budget for protecting America's harbors is $0.

Sure, let's deploy missle defense. Simply raise taxes sufficiently to pay for it. If you want to charge it to my chilrdren's generation instead, take a hike knucklehead.

Where was "Dougie-poo" during the Vietnam War? I've had enough of these GOP draft-dodgers "woofing" about protecting America. Lamborn had an opportunity to show his "luv" for America during the Vietnam War, but opted to cut and run. To a male, on both sides of the political aisle, we are bogged down in Iraq-NAM because of draft-dodgers.

Lamborn should concern himself with reality instead of "Star Wars". 58K Americans were killed in Vietnam. During the last 5 years of that war, 25K Americans died while the U.S. Congress was devising an exit strategy. "Dougie" is soft on this issue because none of his GOP cronies have their blood and treasure being subjected as "sitting ducks" in BodyBagDad, Iraq-NAM.

It needs to be completed and the technology proven.

POST A COMMENT

• It’s open enrollment time: Could consumer-driven health plans be the right choice for you?
• Rural Revitalization or deeper distress?
• No more ‘Mr. Nice Guv’
• In Pakistan, or U.S., lawyers make a stand
• First lesson in Disability 101: Treat me like a regular person -- because I am
• A few questions about abortion
• GUEST COLUMNIST: A new Russia emerges
• Returning veterans need support