missile defense

I think missile defense will be a major research and development area.

Our three countries have the resources and experience to work on missile defense programs today.

It is time for Americans to speak out against missile defense.

Without a missile defense system, the president is forced to back down.

This debate about missile defense is one we're not having.

But the Administration did not entirely give up on a national missile defense.

Makes you glad we are building missile defense, all of that.

One way is to break the mold on missile defense.

"Then I do not wish to work in missile defense."

The Clinton administration at first denied the need for a national missile defense system.

But there is still a huge gulf on missile defense.

"And soon people are obsessed next with missile defense systems."

This gets to the core problem with the Bush approach to missile defense.

His intention is to build a national missile defense system.

Consider, for example, the Democratic collapse on national missile defense.

This would cost a fraction of what the administration will need for missile defense.

The total amount is a couple of billion greater than America's missile defense budget for 2006.

The most important disagreement is over American plans for a national missile defense.

The Bush administration might step up financing for missile defense efforts.

Both men agree for now that Washington should press ahead with research and testing of a missile defense system.

A great deal is already known about what technologies could provide the first steps of missile defense.

The main wave of Russia's missile defense did not work.

His calls were in advance of a speech on missile defense he is to give today.

The dispute over missile defense is likely to play out in the presidential campaign as well.

Rather, we must now ask what role missile defenses will have in our national strategy.