Senate Proceeding on Oct 1st, 2009 :: 9:42:00 to 9:57:20
Total video length: 11 hours 30 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

Note: MetaVid video transcripts may contain inaccuracies, help us build a more perfect archive

Download OptionsEmbed Video

Views:23 Duration: 0:15:20 Discussion

Previous speech:

Next speech:

9:42:00 to 9:57:20( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Jeff Sessions

9:42:07 to 9:42:27( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: quorum call: the presiding officer: the senator from alabama. mr. session: i would ask that the quorum call be dispe with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. sessions: mr. president, i was concerned to learn on september 17 of the president's decision to forego the deployment of ten long-range,

9:42:28 to 9:42:52( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: ground-based interceptors in poland and a radar site for the czech republic which was designed for the defense of europe and the united states against long-range iranian ballistic missiles. and, of course, just a few days ago, the iranians demonstrated their determination, even after they agreed to meet with the

9:42:53 to 9:43:13( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: united states, to deploy such a system by launching a -- a -- their top mid-course that is not long, of course, to a long-range missile. before a committee hearing on the subject in armed services was held last week and it did little really to quell my

9:43:14 to 9:43:37( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: initial concerns and has, in fact, added apprehension about the lack of specifics in the plan that we are hearing that will now be employed. more importantly, the geopolitical implications of reneging on prior united states commitments to key allies should not be underestimated.

9:43:38 to 9:43:59( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: with respect to his so-called phased adaptive app president obama would have us believe that, in his words -- quote -- "this new approach will provide capability sooner, build on proven systems and offer greater defenses against the threat of missile attack than the 2007 european missile defense program."

9:44:00 to 9:44:22( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: i would just add parenthetically, of course, that the europeans did agree and nato did agree to the deployment of ground-based interceptors in poland and the radar in the czech republic. t the -- the reality is more complicated than the president indicates.

9:44:23 to 9:44:46( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: and i just have to say it frankly. first, it is not clear that this new approach will provide capabilities it is not clear that that will happen. in fact, it does not appear under the first phase of this new plan, which is essentially underway, the united states would defend our allies against short-range threats by providing

9:44:50 to 9:45:10( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: providing -- quote -- "smb block 1-a capable warships for protection when necessary of parts of southern europe." so that would mean that we would deploy a aegis cruiser, i smiez, with -- i suppose, with our sm-3 missiles on it. but this is no different than what the previous plan called

9:45:11 to 9:45:35( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: for to suggest it's some new plan is not accurate. to be sure, even today we have aegis ships with sm-3 missiles plying the waters of the mediterranean. we have patriot unit units deployed in and around europe for our short-range defense -- defense against short-range missiles now.

9:45:36 to 9:45:56( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: in phase 2 of this new plan, ich is, we're tol completed by 2015, a more advanced version of the theater sm-3, the 1-b, would be deployed at sea and on land. likewise, under the old plan, the 1-b missile would be deployed and fielded

9:45:57 to 9:46:17( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: though perhaps not on land. in fact -- but it had been discussed. in fact, the last budget prepared by the previous administration called for an increase in the inventory of thaad and sm-3 missiles to cover 450 missiles in the european area by 2015-2016.

9:46:18 to 9:46:38( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: so i'm not seeing any inventory protection -- projections for this new plan, but i would be surprised to learn their numbers are significantly greater than what was previously planned. in fact, the administration has not gotten off to a good start

9:46:39 to 9:46:59( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: in this respect, frankly, as this fiscal year 2010 budget request includes no funding for new sm-3 or thaad purchases. this is the only request budget year we have presented by the administration. they're not requesting any new thaads and any new sm-3 missiles.

9:47:00 to 9:47:25( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: so what's the big, new plan here? the administration request funds previous purchases of missiles but does not include a single new interceptor that would be deployed. so by 2018, in the third phase of the new plan -- 2018, eig years from now -- a newly

9:47:27 to 9:47:47( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: developed would be added to the to protect all of europe against intermediate range missiles. under the old -- this is by 2018. under the old plan, the plan

9:47:48 to 9:48:08( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: that we have been working on for quite a number of years, this sm-a2 capability was meant to complement the deployment of 10 grounds-based interceptors in poland whi protection for most of europe

9:48:09 to 9:48:29( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: and the united states against long-range iranian missiles in the 2015 fipple frame. -- 2015 time frame. in other words, these interceptors were capable of protecting all of europe and the united states, and if a missile is launched from iran to hit the united states, it flies basically over poland. and central europe.

9:48:30 to 9:48:51( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: it's a great place to put it. it's missile we've deployed in alaska alaska. senator begich here has been have en gauged in that. i know we both are concerned to see those numbers be but this is essentially the same missile, except ours in alaska

9:48:52 to 9:49:16( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: and california are three-stage missiles. it would be reduced to a two-stage missile to fit our needs in europe. so finally, the new plan would call for the development of two b missiles by 2020. which would further augment the defense of the united states

9:49:17 to 9:49:37( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: homeland fhomeland from potential icbm threats, close quote. that's what they're telling us what happen. but i've been around here a while. and we don't have this sm-32b missile, even on the drawing board. they just conjured up this idea a few days ago, at least that's

9:49:38 to 9:49:58( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: the first i've heard about t so we've got to build this new missile, not build on the one we've already implanted i alaska and are building now. build a whole new one. it's going to take ten years. and who's to say the congr will be faith follow this 10-year plan? i'll tell you one thing.

9:49:59 to 9:50:20( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: president obama will not spend a dime of his money on it. this is way off in the future. and that worries me because my experience is, those don't always happen. and when you give up on something that's a proven technology, that we are almost

9:50:21 to 9:50:42( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: ready to deploy now, after some hope in the future, this makes me nervous. the two-stage g.b.i. intended for poland and in the old plan

9:50:43 to 9:51:08( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: would have been fielded by 2015 five years earlier than this vision of a 2-b, if the tification of all the agreements had occurred and we pushed for that. the 2015 date is important because iran may have by then long-range missiles capable of reaching all of europe and the united states.

9:51:09 to 9:51:30( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: in march of last year, general craddock --n march of this year, general before congress. this is what he said. quote -- "by 2015, iran may also enjoy an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of reaching all of europe and parts of the united states." close quote.

9:51:31 to 9:51:51( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: that was the testimony given under oath. in may of this year, 2009, an unclassified intelligence report issued by the national air and space intelligence center stated -- quote -- "with sufficient foreign assistance, iran could develop and cast an icbm capable of reaching the united states by

9:51:52 to 9:52:12( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: 2015." close quote. and a final analysis, it's not clear that the new plan set for 20 -- rember, the the thaads are not capable of defending against an icbm that could reach the united states. they'd help in the theater of europe, but not the united

9:52:13 to 9:52:33( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: states. so -- and in the final analysis, it is not clear that the new plan will field capabilities any sooner and indeed it appears later than the plan that exists. and may l coverage in europe for at least

9:52:34 to 9:52:55( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: five years, if we were to move forward with the plan to develop this missile. so, forgive me if i'm not buying into this. this plan, to me, sounds like an excuse for giving up on the european site for the g.b.i.

9:52:56 to 9:53:16( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: the president also claims that his approach is based on proven technology. the assumption being perhaps that the previous plan was frau and, again, that claim is not correct. the administration argues that its approach to providing

9:53:17 to 9:53:38( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: defense of europe with sm-3 bloc-2a and with this 2-b system by 2020 is based on proven technology of the currently deployed sm-31a missile. well, that's just not accurate. the sm-3 that would be effective

9:53:39 to 9:54:00( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: against in diameter. it's an entirely new missile. just because the sm-3 is performing very well for theater defense doesn't mean that they can build an entirely new sm-3 and it's going to be as effective. i assume they could and move forward with it. but it's not a sure thing.

9:54:01 to 9:54:21( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: and while i have confidence, as i say, in that being able to occur, at some stage, i would note that the two-stage g.b.i. intended for poland is also based on proven tech 0nology of the three-stage g.b.i. now deployed in alaska and

9:54:22 to 9:54:43( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: california, which, according to general cartwright, has a probability of intercepting a rogue missile, presumably coming in from north korea. this is a great system. we've invested decades of effort in years-plus have gone into

9:54:44 to 9:55:04( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: developing an antimissile system. we finally got it so we have a 90% chance of having one of these interceptors knock down, hit-to-kill technology in space, over the pacific ocean to obliterate an incoming missile. and we have the radar system designed to pick up these missiles on launch, to track

9:55:05 to 9:55:26( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: them and to guide the missile into the kill system. so it's certainly questionable to me whether the sm-3 bloc-2 variant which requires new boosters and a new kill vehicle is less technologically risky than the two-stage g.b.i., which is scheduled for flight testing in the coming years. finally, the presidentontends

9:55:27 to 9:55:47( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: his approach would offer greater defenses than the previous approach. here he assumes the old approach included only a -- 10 ground-based interceptors in poland. and that his new approach would provide more theater defense on

9:55:48 to 9:56:08( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: land and on sea. i would just say to you, this bothers me because that's never been our plan. our plan always has been to implant icbm's or theater missiles in europe the 10 interceptors in poland

9:56:09 to 9:56:30( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: that would protect us from a rogue attack from a country like iran, who seems determined to d this. now -- so i -- this is where we've been, and i am pleased to see my colleague, senator lieberman, who for his -- throughout his time in the

9:56:31 to 9:56:51( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: senate has been a superb -- has maintained a superb understanding as part of his armed services duty of national missile defense, probably the most knowledgeable person in the senate on that issue, and i think he shares some of my concerns. senator lieberman, thank you for coming. and i've been pleased to join with me in an amendment that could improve our -- with you in

9:56:52 to 9:57:15( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: an amendment could improve our situation today and would be glad to yield to you. but before -- but i was just sharing some general thoughts about our so-called strategy. new in it -- the only part that i see that's new has been the

9:57:16 to 9:57:21( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: abandonment of the polish site, the ground-based interceptor that indeed is capable of