Why We Still Need SDI
Why is the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) still on the public agenda? Didn’t reputable scientists tell us that it was a scientific and technological impossibility to develop? And didn’t they also tell us that even if it should turn out to be feasible, it would be too expensive? Wasn’t it ludicrous to hear Ronald Reagan talk about a shield to protect our country from nuclear missiles; and didn’t all kinds of “experts” treat the idea of what they called “Star Wars” with derision and contempt? Anyhow, now that the cold war is over, and we no longer have an enemy, why do we need a defense against nuclear missiles at all?
Yet a Congress overwhelmingly controlled by Democrats appropriated a record $4.15 billion for SDI this past year, with the expectation that the sum will not be appreciably cut for the fiscal year which began on October 1, in spite of our nation’s fiscal crunch. Why? It surely is not because of pressure by the defense industry for contracts and jobs, because in reality the SDI funding is spread around the country in relatively small amounts.
About the Author