Feedback: Group Questions Need For Missile Defense System
It could mean billions of new dollars spent on Fort Drum - a defense system to protect the East Coast from missiles that might be launched by Iran.
But to one group of scientists, where it might be built misses the point.
"The question really isn't whether Fort Drum is a good site or a bad site. It's actually whether a new missle defense site is a good idea at all," said Dr. Laura Grego of the Union of Concerned Scientists.
The Union of Concerned Scientists says a current interceptor site in Alaska protects the East Coast just as well or better than a new one would.
And anyway, it says the interceptor missiles often miss.
"One would guess the priority would be getting the technology to work before expanding it to new sites," said Grego.
The group is often pegged as liberal, but the Washington Times isn't.
A column in the newspaper says upgrading U.S. radar systems might work better than a new missile site.
The Pentagon is considering both the need for the program and the best site.
North country Congressman Bill Owens is waiting for both decisions.
"If they determine one of these is needed for national security, I'm going to push as hard as I can to make it happen for Fort Drum," said Owens (D. - 21st District).
The site selection process could go another two years.