Striving Against Opposition

Ballistic Missile Defense Redux

In all fairness to my last post on the subject it was dripping with sarcasm and contained a fair degree of frustration with the abject stupidity of the government's decision. We had a chance to play nice with the Americans which cost us exactly nothing, all we had to do was sign on the dotted line, but instead we chose to scorn them. The decision was based on two things a) anti Americanism b) irresponsible pacificism and the hate on many on the left have for all things martial.

This is largely veiled by talk of how expensive the sytem is or how ineffective it is. This is generally hypocricy and malarcky. Its a pretext for anti-Americanism and and do nothing pacificism. Of the tests run so far for ballistic missile defense, which is admittedly still being tweaked 5 out of 6 tests over sea and 5 out of 8 from land have been effect. Even the CBC acknowledges this. As to whether its expensive its estimated to cost the Americans 10 billion dollars. That is a great deal of money without question, on the other hand what would it have cost us? Nothing, or perhaps a few hundred million if we INSISTED on chipping in or putting missiles on Canadian soil which was never likely to happen. We were asked for moral support and to contribute a few scientists and military officers as we normally do in continental defense - essentially falling into our respective Saturday morning cartoon roles of Canada a Pip and America as Hercules. Leaving the Americans to do all the heavy lifting while we piped up in our squeeky voice to cheerlead and tag along.

In this case we chose refuse to score free diplomatic points with our ally and promote good will and understanding in security measures. Our yes, no, maybe, no position and all the dithering that preceded has simply reinforced the notion that we are an unreliable and profoundly silly nation which doesn't take its own defense or soveirgnty seriously

On the other hand, we're quite willing to throw billions and even upwards of 10 billion dollars towards the mythical goal of halting climate change. The Kyoto Accord has become some sort of alter for the left to worship at and it demands its sacrifices. Like any other idol it seems to have rather spotty results for all the sacrifices being deirected towards it. If you look at goal of the Kyoto Accord its to prevent a 0.5 degree increase in temperature which would last for about 6 years before the predicted trends over took it anyhow. Not to mention the fact that its debatable whether human activity has had any influence on climate change. Even if you accept that there is man made climate change is there any point in an treaty which requires India and China to do nothing which have the world's fasted growing economies, quickly growing amounts of polution and half the world's people?

What's the point? Kyoto is a meaningless gesture for those on the left to feel like their "sending the right message."

Me, I'm on the right, I'll take "it works at least half the time so far, but we're working on that."

posted by Chris @ 2/28/2005 12:53:00 a.m.