Quote:
Originally posted by Spanky
I am not for 100% of the budget going to SDI. But a hell of lot more resources than are dedicated to it now. In any defense appropriation there are troubles with wasted money and badly directed funds based on who has the best lobbyist. But this has nothing to do with the logic behind SDI research.
A rational leadership of a country may not nuke us. But an irrational leader might. Delivering WMDs to the United states, contrary to popular belive, is not that easy. That is why it has not been done yet. But lobbing a missile with a nuke or some other WMD is a very real threat.
If war breaks out on the Korean peninsula, I believe there is a strong chance NK will launch a missile at us.
|
As I stated before, I agree with SDI conceptually. But there are limits on how much of the military budget we can spend towards it. We do not have unlimited resources. So what do we do? We assess risks and allocate funds accordingly. This means that it may be rational to not allocate funds for SDI 100% of the time, and this is the part of your post that I was mainly refuting.
I don't think NK has the capacity to reach the US mainland yet, and even if they did, I highly doubt they would attempt it. It makes no sense for them. Far more likely, they would go after Japan.
