More missiles for terrorists?

[BEER980]

More missiles for terrorists?
They are cheap, easily concealed, small enough to hoist on a shoulder and can shoot a passenger jet out of the sky. And now, it appears, terrorists may have access to another 4,000 of them.
The government found that number of shoulder-fired missiles missing from Iraq's inventory, according to weekend news reports. If the number is confirmed, it would triple the previous U.S. intelligence estimate of the number of such missiles outside the control of any government.

The obvious question — and one that will take time to answer — is why the missiles were not secured when U.S. forces invaded. But there's another question: What has been done to protect commercial aircraft from them? The threat is not new, just bigger.

So far, the answer is only research. Two defense contractors are working on prototypes of missile-defense systems to deploy on commercial jets — not much progress considering how long the government has been aware of the threat and how dramatically it has been demonstrated.

In 1997, a White House commission identified the problem and possible solutions.

Four years later, the 9/11 attacks exposed al-Qaeda's interest in aviation as a target.

In November 2002, the threat turned real when terrorists narrowly missed downing an Israeli passenger jet over Kenya with two surface-to-air missiles. A year ago, a civilian cargo plane survived a strike from a shoulder-fired missile after taking off from the Baghdad airport. The plane's wing caught fire, but it landed safely.

The solution is neither easy nor cheap. Military aircraft and Air Force One use systems to deflect missiles, but installing comparable systems on roughly 6,000 passenger jets could cost $10 billion. That's a price tag the struggling airline industry fears.

But if an aircraft is shot down, that cost may look small, and failing to address a preventable threat — whether at airline or taxpayer expense — will look foolish.

Last fall, at a meeting with foreign leaders to try to restrict the transfer of such missiles, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell told his counterparts that "no threat is more serious to aviation."

He was right. Missiles are just the sort of low-tech, high-impact weapons terrorists prefer. Now, they may be easier to obtain.

That should add a sense of urgency, but chances are it won't until a way is found to pay the bill. For that, there are no volunteers.
Source