My question was, Mr. Chairman, if we are going to rely on deterrence, as the gentleman has suggested with national missile defense, and not have a national missile defense, why does not that same reliance on deterrence, why is it not being used in the theater, and why does the gentleman not endorse it in the theater? Instead of having a theater ability to shoot down an incoming missile, why not just say ``We are going to launch on Baghdad when you send a Scud at us?'' I think that is a legitimate question.
Editor's note · Context
Questioning the reliance on deterrence in national missile defense during a committee discussion.
Share
More from Andrew P. Hunter
I want to let all of my colleagues know that, as most of them already do, that tomorrow is the United States Open, the great U.S. Open, the great tradition in golf competition. And it is going to be held at Torrey Pines in San Diego. I…
I appreciate the remarks of both Mr. Israel and the ranking member. I am just looking at the language, and it says ``shall offer employment.'' So it clearly says, if I was going to read that as an agency head, I would say that means I must…
I remember, I think it was 1987 when members of this committee, the Armed Services Committee, sent a letter to the leadership of Israel, and we said this--and I know this because I drafted that letter. We said, at some point in the…
It is my belief that, collectively, NATO is not yet at a maturity level sufficient to effectively incorporate cyber technologies that exploit critical Russian infrastructure.





