The debate on missile defense in the United States is sorely lacking in substance and has been overly politicized, especially recently given the hyper-partisan relationship between Congressional Republicans and President Obama. There is little discussion on the actual capabilities of current missile defense systems and the projected capabilities of future ones. We also haven’t paid enough attention to how others will react to a new strategic environment in which the United States has robust missile defense capabilities (or is perceived to).
USA Today Quotes Phil Coyle on Missile Defense
Report criticizes U.S. missile-defense system By Dan Vergano USA TODAY A congressionally-requested report on the current U.S. missile-defense system says the best way to meet future threats from Iran or North Korea is to place upgraded missiles and improved radars on both coasts of the U.S. Click here to read the rest of the […]
New York Times Quotes Phil Coyle on Missile Defense
U.S. Missile Defense Strategy Is Flawed, Expert Panel Finds By WILLIAM J. BROAD New York Times After two years of study, a panel of top scientists and military experts working for the National Research Council has concluded that the nation’s protections against missile attacks suffer from major shortcomings, leaving the United States vulnerable to […]
Nuclear Weapons: It Is Important to Continue Drawing Down
John and I published an op-ed on US nuclear posture in the Fall 2012 edition of Veterans Vision, a publication that has “focused the experience and dedication of the leaders of America and veterans on the challenges facing the country.”
There’s a Reason Mitt Romney Doesn’t Want to Talk About National Security
Another post over at the Doctrine blog today, this time taking a look at President Obama’s national security record.
