The Missiles of March

May 1985
Progressive;May85, Vol. 49 Issue 5, p11
Comments on the move of both houses of the U.S. Congress to support the use of MX missiles.


Related Articles

  • START BY SCRAPPING THE BLOCKBUSTER MISSILES. Wilson, George C. // National Journal;5/27/2000, Vol. 32 Issue 22, p1702 

    Focuses on the scrapping of the MX missiles under the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty II ratified by the United States Senate in 1996 and approved by the Russian Parliament in April 2000. How to operate the MX missile; Information on the Strategic Arm Limitations Treaty agreement.

  • A Dangerous Expense.  // America;2/27/1982, Vol. 146 Issue 8, p143 

    The article stresses the need for the U.S. Congress to closely look at the $263 billion military budget for 1983 and reject the MX missile system. It notes that the administration of former President Jimmy Carter conceived the MX system as 100 land-based missiles that would be shuttled about...

  • ASPIN'S SCALP.  // New Republic;2/2/87, Vol. 196 Issue 5, p7 

    Presents reasons for the recent action of U.S. House Democrats to depose Les Aspin as chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. Charges laid down on Aspin related to personality conflicts, inattention to colleagues, and untrustworthiness; Statement that Aspin is also charged with...

  • MX: The Misguided Missile.  // America;6/11/1983, Vol. 148 Issue 23, p449 

    The author reflects on the approval given by the U.S. Congress to release funds for developing the MX missile. According to the author, after examining plans for basing the MX, the bipartisan commission headed by Brent Scowcroft recommended placing the missiles in existing silos as the best...

  • MANIFESTO OF THE MX MISSILISTS. Weiner, Ellis // New Yorker;9/8/1980, Vol. 56 Issue 29, p31 

    The article presents a manifesto of the MX missilists regarding the MX Missile System. The missilists are against the use of immobile, fixed-launcher guided-missile systems that are stuck in their silos. They demand the liberation and exaltation of the Principle of Mobile Hiding Weaponry. They...

  • Throwing Money at the Military.  // America;12/25/1982, Vol. 147 Issue 21, p403 

    The author reflects on the rejection of the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate on the $988 million budget proposed by the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) for the start of the production of MX missile in 1982. The author notes that while the rejection may be unacceptable to...

  • Correction.  // Physics Today;Apr2007, Vol. 60 Issue 4, p12 

    A correction to the caption of a photograph of a Peacekeeper missile in the February 2007 issue is presented.

  • The lobbyist and the MX.  // Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists;Feb1983, Vol. 39 Issue 2, p56 

    The article discusses issues related to the MX missile system in the U.S. The U.S. House of Representatives in its loud message indicated that there was no need to advance with MX missile production when no satisfactory basing system was in sight. The message of the Representatives gave a clear...

  • MX: too dense for Congress. Paine, Christoper // Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists;Feb1983, Vol. 39 Issue 2, p4 

    The article speculates about the future of the MX missile after the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee voted to withhold production funds for the missile until the administration of U.S. President Ronald Reagan could develop a survivable basing mode. The House also approved an amendment to...


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics