Dayton v. Kennedy

Returning Senator Mark Dayton to the Ranks of the Idle Rich in 2006

11/30/2004

Threat? What Threat?

Yesterday our good friends at Polipundit assembled a list of recent headlines regarding the ballistic missile capabilities of some prominent United States adversaries. Here we learn that China continues to assist Iran in their nuclear ambitions by providing both material and technical assistance to the regime in Tehran. And for more than a year we have known that China has the means to hit the Western United States and Alaska with their own 12 Dong Feng 31 missiles:

"China now has approximately 36 intercontinental missiles that can hit the United States – 24 older CSS-4 missiles and up to 12 new Dong Feng 31 missiles," said Col. Larry Wortzel, vice president of the Heritage Foundation.
"The Dong Feng 31 missiles can reach Alaska and the western U.S. China has also tested the Dong Feng 31 with multiple warheads," stated Col. Wortzel during a recent Washington conference on missile defense.
The new Dong Feng 31 (DF-31) missiles are attached to the 80304 Unit of the Second Artillery Corps. The 80304 Unit is headquartered in Luoyang, Henan province. Its older CSS-4 missiles can strike targets throughout the United States and Europe.
The new Dong Feng 31 missile can be armed with a single H-bomb with a yield of over 3 million tons of TNT. A single DF-31 missile armed with the huge H-bomb could destroy any major U.S. city including Los Angeles, San Francisco or Seattle.


The proprietors of the appropriately named MAD doctrine will be encouraged that our most potent potential adversary now has the capability of vaporizing American cities but the rest of us are alarmed enough to do something about it. In a national poll conducted for the New York Times, 39% of respondents said it was "very important" and 42% said it was "somewhat important" that "the United States try to build a missile defense shield against nuclear attack."

Well, most of us are encouraged to do something about it. Mark Dayton's response to these threats? "I would be, at this point, not in favor of anything that would cause abrogation of the ABM treaty. I think that's a very, very serious step. (It is) the essential cornerstone of the era that we've managed to live through without a nuclear holocaust."

But Senator, doesn't it matter that the states most threatened are blue?

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home