NMD Public Comments to Pentagon
3 January, 2003
From: Bruce Gagnon
U.S. Army Space & Missile Defense Command
SMDC-EN-V/Mr. Kenneth Sims
PO Box 1500
Huntsville, AL 35807
Dear Mr. Sims:
This letter is in regard to the Army's Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (what was formerly called NMD) Supplemental Environmental Assessment public comment process, with all comments due by January 13.
Our organization would like to go on record as stating that we think this entire program is one giant waste of taxpayer funds. The current testing program (at $100 million a shot) is not going well, and the public is having a hard time believing that we will be attacked by anyone who has a couple of nuclear missiles. (In fact today we know that none of the so-called rogue states have nuclear missiles capable of hitting the U.S.) In the days of the former Soviet Union we heard such dire warnings, and they had enough to really do the job if they have wanted to, but they mysteriously never attacked us. Maybe it was because they loved their children as much as we say we love ours. Maybe it was because they knew it would end all life on Earth.
We've come to the conclusion that programs like this, what we generically call Star Wars, are really about two important things. One is draining the federal treasury into the coffers of the military industrial complex who stand to make big money off this whole effort. The second is that the U.S. is out to militarily "control and dominate" the world on behalf of corporate globalization. Systems like this will ultimately develop new technologies that will allow the U.S. to fight and win all wars on the Earth thus ensuring this mastery of the planet on behalf of the small cadre of rich that now runs our country.
We of course wonder what you are planning for Fort Greely in Alaska where you say you will deploy interceptor missiles by 2004. Will you test them there as well? Will you take the interceptors to Kodiak Island and test them there? How will misfires, which do seem to happen in the real world, impact human and species populations?
We'd much rather our tax dollars go toward providing people with health care that they now cannot afford. That would be a real program of "national security" that is currently going neglected by Washington DC. We'd rather see a major investment in public education, child care and strengthening of social security. How will this program now underway impact these real needs?
In the end we understand that your public comment process is a charade but what the hell, we are paying for it anyway. President Eisenhower was right when he said one day the government is going to have to get out of the way of the people who truly want peace.
We know that what you are peddling is pure tonic water. We will keep spreading the word.
Bruce K. Gagnon