/PRNewswire/ -- Riki Ellison, President and Founder of the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance (MDAA) www.missiledefenseadvocacy.org went on record today praising President Barack Obama and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates on their decision to build and complete 14 additional ground-based interceptor silos in Alaska. His comments on this significant national decision are as follows:
"It is with great respect to the Department of Defense and to the Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, that their decision to only field half of the Ground Based Interceptor (GBI) silos in Missile Field 2 at Fort Greely, Alaska, has been reversed, as the Department of Defense will now fully construct, complete and field all of the 14 silos in Missile Field 2. This decision by the Secretary of Defense is sound, cost-effective for the U.S. tax payers and a forward risk reduction position for our nation and our public for their security against threats of long-range ballistic missiles. The United States can now have the capability and capacity to deploy 44 Ground-Based Interceptors (GBIs) in 44 silos. This is a significant decision that will allow our nation to have a 'hedge' and lower the risk to our national security if in the future Iran, North Korea or other rouge nation states choose to threaten the United States with intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMS)."
"With this decision, the current long-range ballistic missile defense for all of our nation, including Hawaii and Alaska, will have (20) silos in Missile Field 3, (14) Silos in Missile Field 2, (6) Silos in Missile Field 1 in Fort Greely, Alaska and (4) silos in Vandenberg AFB, California for a total of (44) silos. However, the 6 silos in Missile Field 1 in Fort Greely are still scheduled to be 'moth balled' once missile field 2 is constructed and in full operation."
"The Administration is standing firm on deploying 30 GBI's for our nation's protection but clearly has the opportunity to increase those numbers up to 44 if the threat becomes more apparent. A decision is still being decided by the Department of Defense whether or not to field all of the silos in missile field 2 in Fort Greely, Alaska with Ground-Based Interceptors. We encourage and support a decision to fully deploy the 14 missiles in missile field 2, as deploying the GBIs in the newest silos would lower cost, reduce risk and hold higher confidence for those that command and man the missile defense system."
"We applaud and appreciate the rational thinking done by the President, the Department of Defense, the National Security Council and the current Administration to complete missile field 2 in Fort Greely. We also extend our gratitude to the support given by the leadership from Democratic Senator Mark Begich of Alaska and his colleagues for bringing the decision on Missile Field 2 for reconsideration to the Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates. MDAA has been at the forefront of this issue and had the honor and privilege of visiting Fort Greely, Alaska this past September to view the missile fields."
Ellison closed his comments saying: "This significant and definitive decision by the Secretary of Defense and the President to reassess the current world and future threats to our national security and homeland is a leap forward from what it was earlier for the protection of the American public from long range missiles."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.artsacrossgeorgia.com
Arts Across Georgia
Showing posts with label missile defense. Show all posts
Showing posts with label missile defense. Show all posts
04 November 2009
18 September 2009
The Defense of the Eastern and Southeastern United States is at Risk with new Missile Defense Plan
/PRNewswire/ -- Riki Ellison, President and Chairman of the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance (MDAA) www.missiledefenseadvocacy.org details his thoughts on the new missile defense plan announced yesterday by the Department of Defense. His analysis and comments are as follows:
President Barack Obama and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates made a historic announcement yesterday to rescind on previous agreements with the governments of the Czech Republic and Poland to host a missile defense system that would protect the United States and parts of Europe. This decision places the Eastern and Southeastern portions of the U.S. at risk from long-range ballistic missile threats by not protecting those regions as equally as the rest of the country is now currently protected with long-range missile defenses. No realistic solution or alternative was introduced by the President and the Secretary of Defense to replace the long-range protection to our country's Eastern and Southeastern regions provided by those international agreements that are now voided.
The "new missile defense architecture" proposed by the President and the Secretary of Defense relies on the current and future development of sea- and land-based Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) coupled with the Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system and the Patriot point defense system to defend our forward based troops as well as friends and allies in Europe and throughout the world. We support the President's "new missile defense architecture" for its mobility, adaptability, integration, volume, and cost sharing with our allies for protection of U.S. deployed forces and our allies from the growing present threat of short and medium-range ballistic missiles.
However, from a military perspective this "new missile defense architecture" cannot defend the U.S. Homeland from a long-range ballistic missiles; it also cannot defend the two primary missile defense and early warning radars in Fylingdales, England and Thule, Greenland from long-range ballistic missiles. Today, the only system that has proven results to intercept long-range ballistic missiles is the currently deployed Ground Based Interceptors (GBI).
The SM-3 is specifically designed, developed and tested to intercept short- to medium-range missiles not the much faster and higher altitude long-range ballistic missiles. These SM-3 missiles technically cannot intercept long-range missiles in a real world live engagement and there is no validation or proof of concept that indicates otherwise.
Secretary Gates has requested the Congress to deploy 30 GBIs in Alaska and California to provide the U.S. Homeland protection from North Korea and Iran. Because of the extreme distance from Alaska, where all but 3 of the GBIs are deployed, and the distances from California to the Eastern Seaboard and the Southeastern U.S., particularly Florida, "high confidence" and equal protection cannot be attained without the deployment of an additional missile defense site closer to Iran then the current two sites are. The United States has invested tens of billions of dollars over the last seven years to provide an operational long-range missile defense system that provides "high confidence" from current U.S. Combat Commanders as it allows multiple shots from missile defense sites located in Alaska and California to intercept and destroy long-range ballistic missiles. This deployed system is fully operational and has defended our homeland from North Korea earlier this year.
The White House has declared that they expect the new missile defense architecture to be fully operational in 2020. Can those who live in the Eastern and Southeastern parts of our country wait 11 years when they know that they have already paid for a currently deployed system that is fully protecting "with high confidence" all the other parts of our country?
We need a solution and a realistic proven alternative whether that be in Fort Drum, New York, Grand Forks, North Dakota, or someplace else that can provide long-range ballistic protection of the Eastern and Southeastern regions of our country so that our homeland is equally protected.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
President Barack Obama and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates made a historic announcement yesterday to rescind on previous agreements with the governments of the Czech Republic and Poland to host a missile defense system that would protect the United States and parts of Europe. This decision places the Eastern and Southeastern portions of the U.S. at risk from long-range ballistic missile threats by not protecting those regions as equally as the rest of the country is now currently protected with long-range missile defenses. No realistic solution or alternative was introduced by the President and the Secretary of Defense to replace the long-range protection to our country's Eastern and Southeastern regions provided by those international agreements that are now voided.
The "new missile defense architecture" proposed by the President and the Secretary of Defense relies on the current and future development of sea- and land-based Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) coupled with the Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system and the Patriot point defense system to defend our forward based troops as well as friends and allies in Europe and throughout the world. We support the President's "new missile defense architecture" for its mobility, adaptability, integration, volume, and cost sharing with our allies for protection of U.S. deployed forces and our allies from the growing present threat of short and medium-range ballistic missiles.
However, from a military perspective this "new missile defense architecture" cannot defend the U.S. Homeland from a long-range ballistic missiles; it also cannot defend the two primary missile defense and early warning radars in Fylingdales, England and Thule, Greenland from long-range ballistic missiles. Today, the only system that has proven results to intercept long-range ballistic missiles is the currently deployed Ground Based Interceptors (GBI).
The SM-3 is specifically designed, developed and tested to intercept short- to medium-range missiles not the much faster and higher altitude long-range ballistic missiles. These SM-3 missiles technically cannot intercept long-range missiles in a real world live engagement and there is no validation or proof of concept that indicates otherwise.
Secretary Gates has requested the Congress to deploy 30 GBIs in Alaska and California to provide the U.S. Homeland protection from North Korea and Iran. Because of the extreme distance from Alaska, where all but 3 of the GBIs are deployed, and the distances from California to the Eastern Seaboard and the Southeastern U.S., particularly Florida, "high confidence" and equal protection cannot be attained without the deployment of an additional missile defense site closer to Iran then the current two sites are. The United States has invested tens of billions of dollars over the last seven years to provide an operational long-range missile defense system that provides "high confidence" from current U.S. Combat Commanders as it allows multiple shots from missile defense sites located in Alaska and California to intercept and destroy long-range ballistic missiles. This deployed system is fully operational and has defended our homeland from North Korea earlier this year.
The White House has declared that they expect the new missile defense architecture to be fully operational in 2020. Can those who live in the Eastern and Southeastern parts of our country wait 11 years when they know that they have already paid for a currently deployed system that is fully protecting "with high confidence" all the other parts of our country?
We need a solution and a realistic proven alternative whether that be in Fort Drum, New York, Grand Forks, North Dakota, or someplace else that can provide long-range ballistic protection of the Eastern and Southeastern regions of our country so that our homeland is equally protected.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
09 May 2009
President Obama Outlines His Plan for Missile Defense
/PRNewswire / -- Riki Ellison, Chairman and Founder of the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance (MDAA) www.missiledefenseadvocacy.org informed the members of MDAA about the Fiscal Year 2010 budget request for missile defense today. In his alert Ellison reviewed the requests, the impacts and then closed his remarks with two critical questions for our nation about the new direction of our missile defense program. His comments are as follows:
"President Barack Obama released the federal budget for 2010 yesterday in Washington D.C., and this was his first major budget release of his Administration setting the precedent for his Presidency. Inside of his $3.4 trillion budget was the Department of Defense's Budget request of $534 billion and the Missile Defense Budget request for $7.8 billion. The Department of Defense budget was increased by $21 billion, a 4% increase from last year while funding going to the Missile Defense Agency budget was decreased by $1.2 billion, a 13% decrease."
"This Administration has reshaped, restructured and redirected missile defense as they make it their own and take full ownership from the former President George W. Bush and the four previous Presidents that have contributed Department of Defense dollars towards missile defense. With an overall $8.2 billion spent on Missile Defense including Army Patriot Missile Defense systems at $400 million for 2010, missile defense still remains a core mission of the Department of Defense and President Barack Obama's Administration."
"The Obama Administration's direction for missile defense focuses on:
- Increasing capability against short and medium range ballistic missiles in regions against rogue nations to protect our forward based armed forces and allies through deploying more THAAD, SM3 missiles and AEGIS BMD Ships as well as developing land based SM3 missile defense systems.
- Developing assent and upper boost phase missile defense capabilities through SM3/ AEGIS development, enhanced THAAD capability, and deploying a Space Tracking and Surveillance System (STSS) constellation.
- Revamping the testing program with an aggressive amount of significant intercept tests, an estimated 37 or so by 2015.
- Holding in place the development of the European Midcourse Radar in the Czech Republic and the 10 Ground based missiles in Poland until 2011 and ratification comes forward by the Czech Republic and Poland on the agreements with the United States.
- Reducing and enhancing the long range ballistic missile protection of the United States homeland to 30 Ground Based Interceptors in Alaska and California from a projected 50 (40 in US and 10 in Poland)."
"After review of the statements made and examination of the budget, there are two questions regarding this new administration's direction and pragmatic approach for the protection of the American people from ballistic missiles.
1. With the increase of ballistic missile and nuclear proliferation from rogue nations since the beginning of this year highlighted by Iran's satellite launch on February 3; Failure of Diplomacy and international sanctions including UN security resolutions to prevent North Korea from launching a long range missile or space vehicle; North Korea's successful 3 staging of a long range missile on April 5; and North Korea's opening up of their nuclear program and Iran's continual uranium enrichment programs - why is the United States not increasing its missile defense resources?
2. As of less than 6 months ago, the United States Department of Defense through the Missile Defense Agency and the Strategic Combat Command had determined that 50 ground based interceptors were required to defend the territory and the homeland of the United States of America from a simultaneous attack of around two dozen or so projected long range ballistic missiles from North Korea and Iran. What has changed in the threat development and proliferation of ballistic missile capability of either North Korea and Iran in the last 6 months to warrant a 40% decrease to 30 ground based interceptors to protect the American Public and their nation?"
"Missile defense is about our nation and the fundamental core protecting our homeland from current and future threats and should always be a high priority . To sacrifice or reduce the long range missile protection of our nation for short and medium range missile defense capabilities should not be the choice; all should be supported."
"It is of strong merit that international leadership for missile defense is and continues to be led by our nation. The threat continues to grow and we cannot afford to be the only country with capabilities to ensure protection, deterrence and dissuasion against rogue nations. The United States is working with 17 nations in the international community and NATO on missile defense as well as developing missile defense systems with more than 6 countries, thus missile defense resources must be able to continue to support these efforts for global protection. A global problem requires a global solution."
"President Barack Obama and his Administration need to have other options than the United Nations, diplomacy, and use of military force, for if not, he will face a world of new nuclear powers that will be driven by lack of missile defense and U.S. deterrence to become nuclear. This is too important for our nation and our world to not allocate the full resources from the U.S. government.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Follow on Twitter @GAFrontPage
"President Barack Obama released the federal budget for 2010 yesterday in Washington D.C., and this was his first major budget release of his Administration setting the precedent for his Presidency. Inside of his $3.4 trillion budget was the Department of Defense's Budget request of $534 billion and the Missile Defense Budget request for $7.8 billion. The Department of Defense budget was increased by $21 billion, a 4% increase from last year while funding going to the Missile Defense Agency budget was decreased by $1.2 billion, a 13% decrease."
"This Administration has reshaped, restructured and redirected missile defense as they make it their own and take full ownership from the former President George W. Bush and the four previous Presidents that have contributed Department of Defense dollars towards missile defense. With an overall $8.2 billion spent on Missile Defense including Army Patriot Missile Defense systems at $400 million for 2010, missile defense still remains a core mission of the Department of Defense and President Barack Obama's Administration."
"The Obama Administration's direction for missile defense focuses on:
- Increasing capability against short and medium range ballistic missiles in regions against rogue nations to protect our forward based armed forces and allies through deploying more THAAD, SM3 missiles and AEGIS BMD Ships as well as developing land based SM3 missile defense systems.
- Developing assent and upper boost phase missile defense capabilities through SM3/ AEGIS development, enhanced THAAD capability, and deploying a Space Tracking and Surveillance System (STSS) constellation.
- Revamping the testing program with an aggressive amount of significant intercept tests, an estimated 37 or so by 2015.
- Holding in place the development of the European Midcourse Radar in the Czech Republic and the 10 Ground based missiles in Poland until 2011 and ratification comes forward by the Czech Republic and Poland on the agreements with the United States.
- Reducing and enhancing the long range ballistic missile protection of the United States homeland to 30 Ground Based Interceptors in Alaska and California from a projected 50 (40 in US and 10 in Poland)."
"After review of the statements made and examination of the budget, there are two questions regarding this new administration's direction and pragmatic approach for the protection of the American people from ballistic missiles.
1. With the increase of ballistic missile and nuclear proliferation from rogue nations since the beginning of this year highlighted by Iran's satellite launch on February 3; Failure of Diplomacy and international sanctions including UN security resolutions to prevent North Korea from launching a long range missile or space vehicle; North Korea's successful 3 staging of a long range missile on April 5; and North Korea's opening up of their nuclear program and Iran's continual uranium enrichment programs - why is the United States not increasing its missile defense resources?
2. As of less than 6 months ago, the United States Department of Defense through the Missile Defense Agency and the Strategic Combat Command had determined that 50 ground based interceptors were required to defend the territory and the homeland of the United States of America from a simultaneous attack of around two dozen or so projected long range ballistic missiles from North Korea and Iran. What has changed in the threat development and proliferation of ballistic missile capability of either North Korea and Iran in the last 6 months to warrant a 40% decrease to 30 ground based interceptors to protect the American Public and their nation?"
"Missile defense is about our nation and the fundamental core protecting our homeland from current and future threats and should always be a high priority . To sacrifice or reduce the long range missile protection of our nation for short and medium range missile defense capabilities should not be the choice; all should be supported."
"It is of strong merit that international leadership for missile defense is and continues to be led by our nation. The threat continues to grow and we cannot afford to be the only country with capabilities to ensure protection, deterrence and dissuasion against rogue nations. The United States is working with 17 nations in the international community and NATO on missile defense as well as developing missile defense systems with more than 6 countries, thus missile defense resources must be able to continue to support these efforts for global protection. A global problem requires a global solution."
"President Barack Obama and his Administration need to have other options than the United Nations, diplomacy, and use of military force, for if not, he will face a world of new nuclear powers that will be driven by lack of missile defense and U.S. deterrence to become nuclear. This is too important for our nation and our world to not allocate the full resources from the U.S. government.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Follow on Twitter @GAFrontPage
07 November 2008
Russia Helps Solidify Missile Defense in Europe With Remarks by President Medvedev
PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Riki Ellison, Chairman of the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance (MDAA) www.missiledefenseadvocacy.org issued a statement today reacting to remarks by Russia's President, Dmitry Medvedev. The statement is as follows:
"The public remarks by President Dmitry Medvedev of Russia at his state of the union address to the Duma demanding the withdrawal of the U.S. missile defense systems in Europe by threatening the placement of Russian mobile missiles and other military action has helped solidify the continued deployment of the European Missile Defense site by the United States of America and its NATO allies.
"These remarks, made the day after the U.S. election, were directed at the President-elect Barack Obama and his new administration. This rhetoric, reminiscent of 20-year-old cold war tactics, has been used in different degrees and at different audiences over the past two years. The European Missile Defense site the Russians are opposing will consist of a U.S. midcourse x-band radar (EMR) in the Czech Republic and 10 U.S. ground-based interceptors in Poland, which will defend most of Europe including the northwest parts of Russia and Moscow as well as protecting the United States from ballistic missiles launched from Iran.
"This past year, former Russian President Vladimir Putin used a similar type of threat prior to the NATO summit in Bucharest, which had an adverse effect and galvanized the Europeans and NATO to endorse the European missile defense site after his remarks. President Putin also used the threatening rhetoric of targeting missiles towards the Czech Republic and Poland prior to each of their formal agreements with the United States to host these missile defense systems and again his statements galvanized both the population and the leadership to move forward with the agreements.
"This particular threat by President Medvedev comes again at the wrong time to the wrong audience, as it is clearly the first test to President-elect Obama. Like his predecessor before him, President Medvedev's intended intimidation will further embed the European Missile Defense site in the next U.S. Administration rather than less and strengthens the unity of Europe with the United States on missile defense."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
"The public remarks by President Dmitry Medvedev of Russia at his state of the union address to the Duma demanding the withdrawal of the U.S. missile defense systems in Europe by threatening the placement of Russian mobile missiles and other military action has helped solidify the continued deployment of the European Missile Defense site by the United States of America and its NATO allies.
"These remarks, made the day after the U.S. election, were directed at the President-elect Barack Obama and his new administration. This rhetoric, reminiscent of 20-year-old cold war tactics, has been used in different degrees and at different audiences over the past two years. The European Missile Defense site the Russians are opposing will consist of a U.S. midcourse x-band radar (EMR) in the Czech Republic and 10 U.S. ground-based interceptors in Poland, which will defend most of Europe including the northwest parts of Russia and Moscow as well as protecting the United States from ballistic missiles launched from Iran.
"This past year, former Russian President Vladimir Putin used a similar type of threat prior to the NATO summit in Bucharest, which had an adverse effect and galvanized the Europeans and NATO to endorse the European missile defense site after his remarks. President Putin also used the threatening rhetoric of targeting missiles towards the Czech Republic and Poland prior to each of their formal agreements with the United States to host these missile defense systems and again his statements galvanized both the population and the leadership to move forward with the agreements.
"This particular threat by President Medvedev comes again at the wrong time to the wrong audience, as it is clearly the first test to President-elect Obama. Like his predecessor before him, President Medvedev's intended intimidation will further embed the European Missile Defense site in the next U.S. Administration rather than less and strengthens the unity of Europe with the United States on missile defense."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)