OCR Text |
Show MX debate needs sorting As the Iron County Record begins a year of close examination of the MX missile project, and the impact it could have on southern Utah communities, we would first like to pause and to point out what we feel is a serious flaw in public discussion of the matter. There has been a tendency to divide citizens into two groups: pro-MX and anti-MX, based on whether or not they want the system located in Utah. We feel this to be a gross simplificaion of the issue. Discussion on MX should center around three questions. The first has nothing to do with basing the missile in southern Utah. Rather, the question is: "Is the MX the best alternative to anchor America's land-based land-based leg of the strategic triad?" MX in itself does not mean a missile placed in protective shelters in the Nevada-Utah desert. MX is a model of missile, much like Camaro is a model of automobile. There has been much discussion in Washington of looking into other methods fo defense, namely Anti-Ballistic Missiles (now banned under SALT treaty), shoring up the other two legs of the triad (B-52s and c .'. Trident Missies) and space-based Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles. The "MX debate" should really being here. The second question doesn't have anything to do with a Utah-Nevada-basing either. That is : "Is placing the MX missile in multiple protective shelters the most effective and. beneficial method?" Just as the MX missile is only one of several defense options which has been discussed, putting the MX missile in thousands of cement structures is just one of several"basing mode" options. . . Congressional discussion of the basing mode has contained a great . -' deal more controversy than the MX-or-no-MX debate. There are some .$ who want to place the MX missiles in existing Minutemen silos. Others . ,. '.'ffl would like to see them on submarines just off the United States coast. Still others would like to mount them on satellites and orbit them around . ; ; 5bl the earth. -itW The third question, and unfortunately the only one to receive much . discussion, is whether or not to locate the system in this area. - ','" Likely, someone labeled as anti-MX does not oppose deployment of ' ; '. the missile per se, but just placing it in Utah-Nevada. To clarify the debate, that distinction should be made. We anticipate letters on the MX to continue coming in. For our benefit, and the benefit of our readers, please be clear on which aspect of the issue you are speaking on. Tn nrpnnrntinn |