Skip to main content

About your Search

20090604
20171018
DATE
2017 7
LANGUAGE
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)
CSPAN
Apr 7, 2017 2:35pm EDT
national missile defense. then look at the speech george w. bush gave in 2001 given reentry. i think there's a lot of continuity there in terms of, not necessarily the exact readiness, but in terms of strategic rationality. the idea of being simply, we are completeng to accept vulnerability to certain kinds of threats. risk unwilling to deterrence failure and aspect to different kinds of things like north korea. appreciating the lineage and evolution of the programs is also important. looking at the roots, for instance. appreciate can't some of the reliability issues and silasbe -- ekbs today. they are still the events prototype designed put together in the 1990's under avian treat restrictions. furthermore, we are left with little choice to embrace kill vehicles still under development in short order and put them to use. waitingce then, we are for a true design turn on the kill vehicle. instead of light extending the program and for ways. -- extending the program in different ways. an old economy tends to get embrace. the dichotomy that regional missile-defense is good and effective
CSPAN
Apr 7, 2017 5:31pm EDT
. then look at the speech of president george w. bush gave in 2001. announcing withdrawal from the -- and not in terms of the exact assessment of that readiness but in terms of the strategic rationale. the idea of being very simply that we are not unwilling to accept complete vulnerability to certain kinds of threats. we are unwilling to really accept and rest deterrence value with respect to certain kinds of actors like north korea. and on the programmatic side i think appreciating the lineage and evolution of today's program is also important. looking at really the roots of gmd and nmd. i think one can really appreciate some of the real ability issues of ek bees and silos today. if you don't appreciate that in many respects there's delete event prototype design put together in the 90s under abm treaty restrictions. and furthermore the 2002 decision to have a limited defense capability in two years with little choice but to embrace a kill vehicle still under development. furthermore, to adopt a lot of legacy cold war systems that had not been designed for this in short order and p
CSPAN
Apr 7, 2017 10:13am EDT
deploy national missile defense. and then look at the speech that president george w. bush gave in 2001 announcing the withdrawal from the abm treaty. and i think actually there's a lot of continuity there in terms of not necessarily the exact assessment of the technological readiness, but in terms of the strategic rationale. the idea being very simply that we're not unwilling to accept complete vulnerability to certain kinds of threats. we're unwilling to really accept and risk deter rans failure with respect to certain kinds of actors like north korea. and on the programmatic side, i think appreciating the lineage and evolution of today's program is also important. looking at really the roots of gmd and nmd, for instance. i also think one can't really appreciate some of the reliability issues of the ekbs and silos today. if you don't appreciate that in many respects they are still the advanced prototype design put together in the 1990s under abm treaty restrictions. and that furthermore that the 2002 decision to build a limited defense capability in two years left little choice but to
CSPAN
Jun 27, 2017 4:50am EDT
germany and france gets and there are u.s. bodies on the line. the plan was offered to them under george w. bush and then adapted by obama and they took it. you could put a battalion there and they would be just as happy. u.s. contractors care if. the military doesn't care about the national defense. it's nice to have and let me give you a brief example when president clinton came in they asked the joint chief of staff what to do with the budget and they recommended we cut it to 3.12 billion thirds should be spent on theater missile defen defense. it gives a bigger say in the budget and despite the efforts theeffortthey won't go up as mut needs to. it's not going to happen. they choose planes and ships. the ballistic missile defense organization an this, that go bk to the services and let the navy decide how many interceptors we need then you have the forces you need to. [applause] -- ok, we will leave it there. office --gressional the cbo predicted the legislation would reduce the federal deficit ovary 10-your time. but that it would also increase the number of uninsured i 2026 by 22 mi
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)