I hate to keep dragging this thread away from the political arguments, but I will anyway.
The point about the super-fast torpedo changing the way underwater warfare works is well taken. If it works, you could indeed see the case for using active sonar to "light up" the target at a distance and then kill it. There is one problem, though. How do you know when there is a target there? If you run around with active sonar (or any other active search mechanism) on all the time the other side will see you coming from miles away. The super-fast torpedo won't shoot down the aircraft that gets called in to take out the sub that's busy pinging the empty ocean.
The problem with any "wonder weapon" is that it won't stay that way very long. If one side has it and it is effective, the other side will figure out how to build it too. Also, there might be ways to stop it coming in. If it is moving at two hundred miles an hour under water then it might well be possible to put something (other than a ship

) in its path long enough for it to crash into it and be destroyed.
Edit: This is in no way an argument that the technology couldn't be very effective. If the US isn't looking into it we should be (and probably are). A weapon of that nature would not have to be limited to submarines. Since everyone seems to have a way to shoot down anti-shipping cruise missiles, you could use this technology from surface ships to build underwater "cruise missiles". If you could extend their range (perhaps by increasing their size) and give them intelligent seeking capability you could create a whole new class of weapon (drones, anyone?).
[ April 09, 2004, 14:09: Message edited by: Alpha Kodiak ]