Test Of U.S. Shield Fizzles

Posted on Thursday, December 16 at 11:13 by N Say
"Program officials will review pre-launch data to determine the cause for the shutdown," the department's agency said.

The test Wednesday was to have been the first in which the interceptor used the same type of booster rocket that the system would use when it is fully operation. The test was also to have been the first for the multibillion-dollar program since Dec. 12, 2002. That test was also a failure as the interceptor failed to separate from its booster rocket, missed its target and burned up in the atmosphere.

The missile-defense system under development is a scaled-down version of the "Star Wars" defense envisioned by President Ronald Reagan two decades ago against a rain of missiles from the Soviet Union. The system now contemplated would guard the United States against attack from smaller "rogue nations."

Before the test Wednesday, the Pentagon agency had conducted eight tests with interceptor vehicles, scoring hits in five. Some critics of the Missile Defense Agency, which has spent more than $80 billion since 1985, say the entire program is unrealistic, and that the tests have been scripted. On the contrary, the agency says. It says the tests are designed to answer specific questions and "to build confidence in the system that we are working to design."

The end of the cold war made Reagan's original vision seem outdated. The administration of President Bill Clinton explored a less advanced system. Then George W. Bush pledged during the 2000 campaign to push for a scaled-down version of the Reagan plan.

It was not immediately clear how long Wednesday's failure might delay deployment of the system.

Link

Contributed By


Topic


Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. Thu Dec 16, 2004 11:50 pm
    HA HA!

    ---
    Dave Ruston

  2. Fri Dec 17, 2004 2:58 am
    my thoughts exactly!

  3. Fri Dec 17, 2004 3:48 am
    The story submitted above was the spark I needed to write a letter to the editor of my local papers. As follows:

    Dear Editor

    Why can’t Mr. Martin just say no to Ballistic Missile Defence? Every person who has spoken on this subject, including many with superior scientific knowledge, have said this system will not work. The news is now reporting the tests have failed, and all due to an anomaly in space! I am thinking the anomaly is not only in space, but down here on earth where the logical thinkers know that no amount of money will make this system work, yet our politicians keep trying to convince us otherwise. The reality of this ‘defence’ has become the renewed arms race. Canada was a leader in non-proliferation of WMD, we stood up for peace and today we have a PM and many cabinet ministers who are in total denial of the impact this BMD, is having on foreign affairs. When will we ever learn, you don’t create peace, while proposing new methods for space war? The only people denying that BMD is about giving the U.S.A. full control of space through weapons, and therefore total control of the world, is our own government.(Read Vision 2020 the U.S.’s own document) If these world leaders, applied as much energy and money to solving the world’s hunger, poverty and disease, as they do funding the arms industry; we could all live in peace!

    Yours truly

    Catherine Whelan Costen

    ---
    If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

  4. Fri Dec 17, 2004 9:17 am
    Exactly whelan,

    $85 Billion just to prove again it dosen't work! One of my sisters was in Tanzania, Africa and did some volunteering at a school where sponsers pay $365.00 a year to educate a child. That includes their uniform, all school supplies, lunch and a snack.

    A small portion of the US military budget could help fund schooling in the US, but I guess if you have an educated population you couldn't spend $85 Million of their hard earned money on failed missle testing?

    ---
    "Yeah, well, [Mr. President] we used all five fingers because that's the way our mittens are made." Antonia Zerbisias

  5. Fri Dec 17, 2004 1:48 pm
    Yes, Canada would have thrown in the towel at the conceptual stage. Too hard. Viewing Mt. Everest for the first time, a Canadian would have said, "I will not climb it because it is there."

  6. Fri Dec 17, 2004 3:19 pm
    Canada should sign on to missile defence. Firstly because there are actual missiles pointed at North America, secondly because Canada should take at least a token responsibility for its own defence and therefore sovereignty, thirdly because our Allies(the United States, Britain, Japan, Australia, Denmark) are a part of the Missile Defence program and we should support our allies if we want any respect in the world.

  7. Fri Dec 17, 2004 4:53 pm
    Quite the opposite actually anonymous. You gain respect in the world stage by following treaties you have signed and not tearing them up just for laughs... We made a commitment on weaponization of space and Canada is far safer to keep a good world profile then re-nag on treaties we signed.

  8. by avatar Jesse
    Fri Dec 17, 2004 8:49 pm
    While George Bush and Jerry Jay, viewing that same mountain, say "it might hurt us someday, let's destroy it!".

    ---
    Jesse

  9. Fri Dec 17, 2004 9:24 pm
    Yeh and we have other allies smart enough to listen to their own people and scientists and stay the hell out of missile defence.

    If your friends jump off a bridge do you too?

  10. Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:17 am
    The other part of the problem anon is that if there are missiles pointed at North America, we can't stop them with the BMD! So wouldn't it be better to stop funding the war machine and start decreasing the weapons,stop selling the makings of the missiles...no that would be too easy and not make the corp any money...so we'll just keep pouring healthcare,education,etc money into the program while people starve all over the world and the war lords live in grand style. No we do have to wake up to what is happening here and become educated enough to stand up for ourselves and speak out.

    ---
    If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

  11. Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:54 am
    I think singing kumbaya is the solution to almost everything wrong with the world today.

  12. by avatar Jesse
    Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:54 am
    It would be just as effective as these missile launch tests. :P

    ---
    Canadians are asking, why do americans hate us? They hate our freedoms: our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to disagree with each other.

  13. Sat Dec 18, 2004 4:34 am
    I love you Jerry Jay. (kisses and hugs)

    ---
    "Yeah, well, [Mr. President] we used all five fingers because that's the way our mittens are made." Antonia Zerbisias

  14. Sat Dec 18, 2004 4:51 am
    I would love nothing more than to live in a world without weapons. Why can't we change the thinking to be "get the new stupidity shield - school books for kids", or "a simple weapon against drought and famine found - funding water wells in impoverished countries", or "war on AIDS underway -millions being spent on medications".

    We need to become innovative and find a way to make the spin and manipulation that's been so effect in working against us, work for us.

    ---
    "Yeah, well, [Mr. President] we used all five fingers because that's the way our mittens are made." Antonia Zerbisias



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.




Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

canadian bloggers | canadian news