MDAA Legislative Alert

Our latest Legislative Alert was featured on the Heritage Foundation’s National Security Blog

MDAA on the Defense Budget

The Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance (MDAA) released a legislative alert on the defense budget. Under the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2010, missile defense will lose $1.2 billion in funding. Missile interceptors in Alaska and California would be reduced from 44 to 30.

According to the alert, President Barack Obama intends to shift away from national missile defense to theater missile defense. Earlier this month, we noted that the Obama administration planned to shift funds away from weapons and research for future conflicts and focus on weapons needed for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The NDAA passed the House and Senate in committee, and lawmakers are introducing amendments to restore funding.

The MDAA notes that missile defense cuts would cancel the Multiple Kill Vehicle, Kinetic Energy Interceptor, and Airborne Laser. Visit the MDAA site for more information.

Missile defense making a comeback with Begich

Sen. Mark Begich (D-AK) has an amendment that doesn’t restore all of the money to missile defense, but it does restore some. It saves some of the planned ground-based interceptors supposed to go in at Fort Greeley, Alaska.

The amendment isn’t through and there’s still plenty of work to be done, but this is the most progress that has been made to restoring any of the cuts to missile defense thus far this session.

Sen. Begich worked hand in hand with his fellow Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowsko (R-AK). From day one, both have been supporters of missile defense. As a member of the Armed Services Committee, Begich has asked tough questions of MDA and Administration officials. He has only been in the Senate for six months, but already he’s making his voice heard and making an impact.

The amendment would finish construction the 14 interceptors that had been moved to testing and backup programs. It would close up six silos built hastily four and five years ago that are having maintainence problems.

This doesn’t end the fight for the other interceptors. Already the system is behind because there have been maintainence issues with the interceptors alread emplaced. Plus there are seven more interceptors to fight for. The amendment also doesn’t allocate money. That will come from Appropriations, which is one of the committees on which Sen. Murkowski sits.

There’s still work to be done.

Find out more here and here.

JSanderson

Subscribe to MDAA Blog

Missile Defense: A History (part 1)

Over the next few days, we’ll be breaking down the history of missile defense, from the political atmosphere that first brought it to the forefront and on through its development.

___________________________________________________________________________________________

During the years that followed the end of World War II, the Western Democracies, lead by the United States, and the Soviet-lead Eastern Bloc were locked in a political, economical, ideological and sometimes military battle known as the Cold War. In the military arena, both main superpowers, were developing more advanced offensive weapon systems like the long-range bomber and the new intercontinental ballistic missile system as a mean to safeguard each country against the possibility of a preemptive strike by the other superpower.

A counterweight was needed to be found in order to defend the United States against this possibility. With the development of the nuclear bomb and later the thermonuclear bomb, the battlefield was changed for ever. All existing defensive systems were rendered obsolete the moment the bomb was delivered to Nagasaki. The awesome power of this new weapon altered the Pentagon’s defense strategy.

In the past, the United States mainland defenses were focused at an conventional invasion attempt. Now, with the realization that a massive nuclear attack could cripple most of the country in hours, the United States military planners began to construct a new defense posture. The new posture was centered around the means of stopping the enemy ability to produce a surprise nuclear strike. This means stopping the bombers and the offensive ballistic missiles. By the mid 1950s, after an extended period of research and the development, the U.S. was able to field a first generation antiaircraft missile system that was capable of delivering conventional or nuclear warheads at incoming bomber formations. At the same time, both the United States and the Soviet Union were moving ahead with the development of a series of offensive missile platforms that could deliver a bigger nuclear payload against ground targets located thousand of miles away. The need to defend the home land was more imperative now that at any time in the history of the United States. The development and fielding of workable defensive missile system was giving top priority by the U.S. government.

These missile systems were the ultimate in weapon development of the era. Massive amounts resources were invested in the research and development of these missile systems. This book will provide the reader with an overview of the fixed, land-based defensive missile systems developed by the United States during the years of the Cold War. The NIKE, BOMARC and Safe Guard programs will be discussed as well as the deterrence missile systems, the Atlas, Titan, Minuteman and Peacekeeper will also be discussed. The book end with a brief look at the future of the United States antiballistic missile defenses in the 21^st century.

RColon

For more on the history of missile defense, including legislation, see the MDAA website

Check back tomorrow for more on missile defense history.

Subscribe to MDAA Blog

Multiple Kill Vehicle Test

Multiple Kill Vehicle (MKV) Test

Check out this video of the 2008 MKV test. In the test the MKV identifies and follows a simulated target. It uses its boosters to move vertically, horizontally and even can stop and restart itself. Make sure you watch the whole video!

MFuller