Wizards of Oz

"Life is fraughtless ... when you're thoughtless."


Reagan's "Star Wars": 30 Years Later

In February 2011, my blogfriends at Chicago Boyz hosted a "Reagan Centenary Roundtable" in honor of the 100th birthday of our 40th President. My contribution to that Round Table was a celebration of President Reagan's "Star Wars Speech" -- a speech that he gave thirty years ago today.

It is ironic that Sequestration (per the Budget Control Act of 2011) risks "...trimm[ing] to the limits of safety" our defense budget -- which is exactly what President Reagan was trying to undo. His logic was simple: a strong military was a credible deterrent, and deterrence was the basis by which weapons of mass destruction could become obsolete.

So to commemorate the 30th anniversary of Reagan's compelling speech on global security, is a blast from the Wayback Machine:


"A new hope for our children in the 21st century"

{Crossposted from ChicagoBoyz.net, which is hosting a "Reagan Centenary Roundtable" in honor of the 100th birthday of our 40th President}

Tomorrow afternoon (Monday, February 7th, 2011), the first Monday in February, President Obama will deliver his Fiscal Year 2012 Presidential Budget to the Congress.  This is the opening act of our annual budgetary tango, with copious debate over the coming months of the necessary trades between programs.

On March 23rd, 1983, a few weeks after President Reagan presented his Fiscal 1984 budget to Congress, he gave his famous "Star Wars Speech" to a national televised audience.  Although "Star Wars" was the derisive name opponents used to mock the fantastic nature of the President's vision, President Reagan's speech was singularly focused on restoring American military strength and credibility -- and to "... pave the way for arms control measures to eliminate the [nuclear] weapons themselves."

Ironically, unlike President Kennedy's 1962 speech at Rice University that was fully focused on the seemingly-impossible challenge of putting a man on the moon (and Rice defeating Texas in football), Reagan's "... call [to] the scientific community in our country, those who gave us nuclear weapons, to turn their great talents ... to the cause of mankind and world peace: to give us the means of rendering these nuclear weapons impotent and obsolete" warranted only a couple of sentences in an otherwise lengthy speech.

Rather, this speech was part of “…a careful, long-term plan to make America strong again after too many years of neglect and mistakes,” and (when coupled with President Reagan's "Evil Empire" speech to the National Association of Evangelicals in Orlando just two weeks prior) was a deliberate escalation of Cold War rhetoric.

President Reagan was rightfully concerned that the defense budget had been “trimmed to the limits of safety” by Congress.  This decay of U.S. armed forces led Reagan “…to improve the basic readiness and staying power of our conventional forces, so they could meet - and therefore help deter - a crisis.”  But his confidence in the logic of deterrence had limits.  The Star Wars Speech presented to the world Reagan's realization that deterrence based solely on commensurate offensive capabilities was fallacious.
“Over the course of these discussions, I have become more and more deeply convinced that the human spirit must be capable of rising above dealing with other nations and human beings by threatening their existence....  Wouldn't it be better to save lives than to avenge them? Are we not capable of demonstrating our peaceful intentions by applying all our abilities and our ingenuity to achieving a truly lasting stability? I think we are - indeed, we must!”
The Strategic Defense Initiative Organization (SDIO, precursor to today's Missile Defense Agency) was founded the following year, 1984.  Reagan realized the complexity of the task, noting in his speech that it “... may not be accomplished before the end of this century.”  Yet the U.S. Army PATRIOT terminal defense system performed admirably in early 1991 during DESERT STORM, and today's U.S. Navy Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) has been used to destroy a failing satellite (Operation BURNT FROST, February 2008) as well as form the future foundation of land-based European missile defense and our nation's "Phased Adaptive Approach". [Addendum: As of March 2013, SecDef Hagel has announced a nearly-50% increase in our Ground-Based Interceptor arsenal at Fort Greely, Alaska, as a hedge against a nascent North Korean threat.]

The magnitude of the technical challenge caused many to blanche in 1983, and to ridicule the President.  Yet today's successes would never have been possible if President Reagan had not had the faith to "... [launch] an effort which holds the promise of changing the course of human history."

For that, we have "... a new hope for our children in the 21st century."


Open Letter to Congress

Now that the Sequester -- the by-product of the Budget Control Act of 2011 -- has been invoked, I have sent an open letter to my Congressman (Cong. Doug Lamborn, CO-05) and Senators (Sen. Michael Bennet and Sen. Mark Udall) explaining the negative impact of their delayed implementation of such a drastic measure. While I do believe a 10% cut in discretionary spending accounts is a good idea, waiting until the waning months of a fiscal year to invoke it profoundly magnifies the consequences:

Dear Senator Bennet, Senator Udall, and Congressman Lamborn:

I am writing as a constituent, a federal employee, and a concerned citizen.

Our current state of Sequestration is a dangerous condition that risks derailing our tenuous economic recovery.

The delays in enforcing the Budget Control Act of 2011, while seemingly good in the short term, are compounding the effects on those who serve our nation as civilian employees.

Now that the Sequester has been invoked, my employer (the Missile Defense Agency at Schriever AFB) is planning 22 days of federal furloughs in the final few months of the fiscal year.

The only way to be compliant with the law as now written is one-day-per-week furloughs of civilian employees. In my case, that 20% reduction in duty hours translates to a 27% net loss in take-home pay (since health benefits and life insurance costs are constant).

I urge you and your fellow Senators and Representatives -- on BOTH sides of the aisle -- to consider the ripple effects of such a drastic cut in take-home pay for the tens of thousands of federal employees in Colorado.

Please work to resolve this issue on behalf of ALL of your constituents.

Sincerely yours,

Shane Deichman