Columnist’s aims are unclear

What was the purpose of publishing Clifford D. May’s rant on missile defense (“Missile defense too vital to be under the radar,” column, May 19)? I cannot determine from his column (and I have read it three times) if he is being facetious, satirical or serious. Several of the paragraphs seem disjointed or disconnected with the points made in others.

It seems that he is trying to mock the opposition to missile defense, but I wonder if I am the only one “not getting” his message.