I applaud your well-reasoned editorial against basing strategic missile defenses in Maine (“Our View: There’s no place in Maine for missile defense site,” Aug. 20).

Although I agree that non-military considerations are the principal factors behind congressional interest in East Coast siting, I would add an additional “military” reason for skepticism about the concept: There is no sign of an intercontinental missile emerging from Iran.

Unlike North Korea, Iran professes no interest in developing ICBMs. Moreover, alarmist projections of long-range Iranian missile developments by missile defense advocates have been consistently proven wrong.

No Iranian ballistic missiles even remotely capable of reaching the United States have ever been seen or flight-tested. Yet multiple flight tests over a period of years would be necessary for Iran to make such a weapon operational – something which would push even a theoretical Iranian missile threat against the U.S. homeland into the next decade.

Greg Thielmann

Arms Control Association

Washington, D.C.


Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or login first for digital access. Here’s why.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.