Mr. President, the administration's position on defending the American people is essentially twofold: One, wait until there is a threat; and, two, we will then develop a defense. There are two things wrong with this approach: First, as the Indian nuclear testing has just demonstrated to us, we won't necessarily know when there is a threat. In fact, we always seem to underestimate the threat. Secondly, it always seems to take longer than we anticipate to develop complex systems, and this is particularly true with respect to missile defenses. So the legislation introduced by the Senator from Mississippi is a much better idea, to protect the American people, Mr. President. It simply says that it is our policy to deploy a national missile defense as soon as it is technologically possible. Now, what could be more straightforward and more protective for the American people? The American people demand no less.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the need for a national missile defense during Senate floor debate.
Share
More from Jon Kyl
The best way to deter a nuclear conflict is to deter a conventional conflict with the nuclear powers.
I know that the Democratic leader is scheduled to speak next, but if there is a minute that I could take in between, I just wanted to comment on my colleague who spoke yesterday, Senator Collins. I had wanted to come to the floor to speak…
the possibility of an attack coming from one of these hypersonic weapons would be a preemptive, or out of the blue kind of attack, it could be decapitating.
I thank the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee for engaging in this brief colloquy and for specifically calling for a hearing a couple of weeks ago at which the two cochairmen of the National Defense Strategy Commission…





