2006-07-19 03:33:55 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
yes! the star wars (officially known as the Strategic Defense Initiative or SDI) program is not offensive but defensive . reagan knew that we would soon face an ICBM threat so he decided on a defensive strategy to keep nuclear warheads out of our borders. it is not an offensive-oriented program as some people think.
2006-07-19 03:42:39 · answer #1 · answered by triskaidekaphobia 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It was necessary to make the old 'detente' strategy less necessary. The possibility of a shield that actually worked would mean that there would be no more mutual assured destruction if the USSR and the USA went to war. This means that there would be a definite winner.
Let me explain. Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) basically states that if two countries with nuclear capabilities decide to attack each other they will both get ****** up equally.
That was the situation until Reagan claimed to have a working star wars program (which, by the way, is the devils urine and isn't worth ****). The star wars program (which was also seen quite skeptically not only by the USSR but by every other realistic country) implied that if the US and USSR went to war, the US would be able to defend itself and the only country to get destroyed would be the USSR.
that's it.
Did I mention that Star Wars isn't worth ****?
2006-07-19 10:41:37 · answer #2 · answered by AnonymousNickname 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, considering that the only successful tests of the system involved knowing the trajectory of the target missiles and placing a homing device on them also, the tests can only be called failures. The money poured into this sham was nothing more than a transfer of borrowed money to favored corporations that your grand-children are going to have to pay back.
2006-07-19 10:35:50 · answer #3 · answered by iknowtruthismine 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It failed miserably, but it was a good idea at the height of the Cold War.
2006-07-19 10:36:26 · answer #4 · answered by Blunt Honesty 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In the long term it really doesnt matter, If any of these extremists get a hold of nuclear weapons then it doesnt matter where it goes off , we'll all be effected anyway.....
2006-07-19 10:37:57 · answer #5 · answered by lost&confused 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I certainly think it isn't a bad idea. Having something that works as a "shield" from incoming missiles is not a bad idea.
2006-07-19 10:36:10 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pssssssst....President Regan was suffering from Alzhiemers...remember.
2006-07-19 10:41:26 · answer #7 · answered by Bobbie E 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No because it just perpetuates the continuation of the arms race and wastes money best spent in other areas.
2006-07-19 10:37:59 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
He got that idea from watching an old Sci Fi Movie, what do you think ?
2006-07-19 10:50:51 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
We won't know until it is proven effective, or ineffective.... hopefully we will never have to find out!
2006-07-19 10:38:58 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋