"Star Wars" Missile Defense

[furie]

do you think a missile defense network for the US will create a new arms race?


<img src="http://tseery.homestead.com/files/ghostrider.jpg" width=300 height=100>
<marquee behavior="alternate"><a href="aim:goim?screenname=furie1335&message=You_are_Number_6">IM:Furie1335
</a></marquee>


This message was edited by furie on 12-17-02 @ 3:27 PM

[A.J.]

I don't think so today. Who would the arms race be with? The Russians can't afford it and the Chinese are undergoing a modernization of all their forces: including improving the range of their missiles.

<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/ajdcsig.jpg">

A Skidmark production.

[canofsoup15]

Why would it do that, dosent everyone already have enough nukes to blow up the world several times. If anything itll probably create a Dis-arms race, no doubt other countries will want one of these defense systems as well.

<img src=http://members.aol.com/vikorynotvengnce/images/canofsoup.gif>

The plan was mastered and called genocide
Took all the children and then we died
A few that remained were never found
All in a system,down

[sexy bastard]

i actually have to agre with the soup

<img src=http://publish.hometown.aol.com/leonj25/myhomepage/sb.jpg?mtbrand=AOL_US>

www.leohernandez.net
the epitome of masculinity (yeah right)

[furie]

an arms race to build better missiles to beat the defense network. Then a race to build a better defense. then a race to build better missiles......

<img src="http://tseery.homestead.com/files/ghostrider.jpg" width=300 height=100>
<marquee behavior="alternate"><a href="aim:goim?screenname=furie1335&message=You_are_Number_6">IM:Furie1335
</a></marquee>

[DarkHippie]

cause this will stop a suitcase nuke? and the program has so far gone through trial testing like the G Train through Bklyn: slowly and half-assed.

<IMG SRC=http://thereisnogod.faithweb.com/images/darkhippie2.gif>
<marquee>Who is DarkHippie? "You look like an Amish child molester"-- Jim Norton. "Watch out for this one. Someday he's gonna snap and kill you all."-- Rich Vos </marquee>
<i>LABELS ARE FOR PRODUCTS, NOT PEOPLE! DON'T HUG A TREE, PLANT ONE!
</i><a href=http://www.freeopendiary.com/entrylist.asp?authorcode=A537085>Gonads and Strife: a journal</a>

[Butters]

Don't be stupid, nothing can get past Han Solo and Chewie....hehe ^.^

<IMG SRC="http://nortonfan.com/shit/athfsig.jpg">
If it ain't aggie it ain't good

[A.J.]

Here's the DoD Press Release that came out this afternoon:

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Dec2002/b12172002_bt642-02.html

<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/ajdcsig.jpg">

A Skidmark production.

This message was edited by AJinDC on 12-17-02 @ 4:17 PM

[Violent Jay]

everyone is the us's bitch. We own all. If everyone in the world teamed up on us we would win

http://tseery.homestead.com/files/vjayxmas.gif
R.I.P Skipper

[Yerdaddy]

The problems with the system so far is that it can't distinguish decoys from real warheads, (even when the tests have been rigged). So it will eventually add to an arms race, and increase the incentive for the handful of current nuclear states to spread nuclear and missile technology. But the incentive for adversaries will not be to build a better missile, but to build a better decoy. This gives the advantage to the offensive rather than the defensive technology.

<img src="http://yerdaddy.homestead.com/files/pics/sigelvis.jpg" >
It was a joke goddammit!

[A.J.]

The problems with the system so far is that it can't distinguish decoys from real warheads, (even when the tests have been rigged).


True but part of the effort will be to develop a radar that will better discriminate decoys or PENAIDS (penetration aids) from warheads. Most of these nations don't have MIRVed missiles -- they have single warheads: just as dangerous of course.

So it will eventually add to an arms race, and increase the incentive for the handful of current nuclear states to spread nuclear and missile technology. But the incentive for adversaries will not be to build a better missile, but to build a better decoy. This gives the advantage to the offensive rather than the defensive technology.


First things first: aspiring nuclear states want to develop nuclear weapons, specifically warheads. Then they would work on the delivery system(s): missiles that have longer ranges and better accuracy. This can be done cheaply as China and North Korea have been willing to sell this technology to any and all interested parties.

I think that right now for aspiring nuclear states its simply a matter of having the capability rather than worrying how to overwhelm a potential missile defense system.

<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/ajdcsig.jpg">

A Skidmark production.

[Bob Impact]

The Star Wars system is nothing more than typical Republican babble. It has never reliably worked, costs million of dollars, and can never stop a terrorist bombing. Homeland security is fine, but until leaps and bounds are made, the money is still wasted.

<center><img src="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/bobimpact.gif"><br>
<a href="http://www.silentspic.com" target="_blank">Thanks, Slient Spic!</a></center>

[canofsoup15]

The Star Wars system is nothing more than typical Republican babble. It has never reliably worked, costs million of dollars, and can never stop a terrorist bombing. Homeland security is fine, but until leaps and bounds are made, the money is still wasted.


What are you talking about, they tested it 2 times already and it has worked.

<img src=http://members.aol.com/vikorynotvengnce/images/canofsoup.gif>

The plan was mastered and called genocide
Took all the children and then we died
A few that remained were never found
All in a system,down

[NewYorkDragons80]

It could work. I don't understand how people can say "Hey it hasn't worked yet." Guess what? The program is still in the works? Nobody is saying this is a final version of the defense system.

"In war there is no substitute for victory."
-General Douglas MacArthur

"If gold should rust, what will iron do?"
-Geoffrey Chaucer

"Worship him, I beg you, in a way that is worthy of thinking beings.
-Romans 12:1

[A.J.]

The Star Wars system is nothing more than typical Republican babble.


Not true. Clinton increased R&D funding for a ground-based system with a 2003 target date.

There has been significant Democratic support most notably liberal Rep. Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii -- whose district and state is within range of Chinese and North Korean missiles.

<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/ajdcsig.jpg">

A Skidmark production.

[The Jays]

and can never stop a terrorist bombing.


Well, duh. It is to prevent missles from striking the US. The reason we're going with this is because Bush withdrew from the anti-IBM treaty, and he did that because 1) it didn't do anything 2) the country we signed it with no longer exists.
True, this system can't stop terrorist bombings. That is what Homeland security is for. Missle defense is so that our military can prevent people from attacking us.

<font color="blue" face="Trebuchet MS" size=-2> F--- what you heard.</font>
<font color="blue" face="Trebuchet MS" size=-2> That cab has a dent in it.</font> [center]
[center]http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/jays777/mementochristmas.gif



This message was edited by TheJays on 12-17-02 @ 7:04 PM

[NewYorkDragons80]

Actually, the North Koreans could not hit Hawaii if they tried. During a 1997 test, their dummy missile could not even break into the upper atmosphere, let alone reach Hawaii.

"In war there is no substitute for victory."
-General Douglas MacArthur

"If gold should rust, what will iron do?"
-Geoffrey Chaucer

"Worship him, I beg you, in a way that is worthy of thinking beings.
-Romans 12:1

[CaptClown]

It could work. I don't understand how people can say "Hey it hasn't worked yet." Guess what? The program is still in the works? Nobody is saying this is a final version of the defense system.

You took the words right out of my mouth. No invention worked right off of the drawing board. They all have to be worked on and fine tuned before they even resemble he vision of the inventor. Even after they work as the inventor wants there are always improvements to make.

As long as the inventor doesn't write a book titled, "To Serve Man", I'll be happy.

This message was edited by CaptClown on 12-17-02 @ 7:45 PM

[TheMojoPin]

*EDIT*I like pies for both dinner and dessert. If only someone made me a pie for breakfast.

<img src=http://home.ix.netcom.com/~camman/_uimages/mojopin3.gif>
VP #2 for the Coalition of Angry Micks, and Minister of Bloody Mayhem.
"You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 12-18-02 @ 12:25 AM

[Bob Impact]

Guess what? The program is still in the works? Nobody is saying this is a final version of the defense system. Seeing as how the US Government has spent 70 BILLION over 20 years studying this, it isn't exactly a new study. The preliminary test of a Theater Missile Defense System (The precursor to the NMD system) during the Gulf War was a horrendous failure. The claimed 96% rate of Patriots fired to SCUDS destroyed was later dropped to 46% and then down to 25%. Even this may be high, as other estimates put it at 9 to 45 and as high as 1 to 150. That was in the early 90's. There were so many misfires and deflections the standard for acceptance was reduced from two successful interceptions down to one. It simply did not work. <P>
Clinton, for his part, did authorize the Three plus Three program to build a NMD by next year, PROVIDED that a credible threat could be established. No credible threat was shown so he killed the effort before he left office. <P>
What are you talking about, they tested it 2 times already and it has worked. Furthermore, the current system uses a laser to destroy the booster of an ICBM, which, depending on the time or interception could deflect itself into any number of places on the globe, Imagine Bush trying to explain that one away with his fumbled language. The technology to destroy an ICBM completely is still several years off and not even in development yet. The 4 out of 6 kills the pentagon is claiming were all accomplished by deflecting the dummy ICBM. The tests were also performed at a slower speed and with unrealistic wartime geometries to make the tests easier on a bare bones system. <P>
whose district and state is within range of Chinese and North Korean missiles. He, like I, is not opposed to Researching a NMD or TMD system, however, this is not the current issue, the current issue is Bush's Hell or High Water declaration that the Pentagon have a system in place by '04. R&D is fine, deployment of an imperfect system is something else entirely. <P>
To this date, no credible enemy can reach US soil with an ICBM. It is currently estimated that North Korea is a decade ore more away from ICBMs , not to mention that due to the famine, the current regime is having difficulty maintaining control, and may be ousted soon. Our only two other worries would be allies Russia and China. It's not much a threat. <P>
The most insulting thing I've heard about this system is Bush saying that it would help defend us if terrorists were to launch an ICBM (This is in the AP article). I'll let you draw your own conclusion from that. <P>
That being said, I'm sure when Technology progresses there will be a place for a NMD system, however, at this time, the tactical limitations are too strong, the cost is too high and the gains are too little for it to be anywhere NEAR cost effective, but, as I said before, I'm not entirely opposed to researching it. <P>
But then again, I've got a gut full of Scotch. <P>

<center><img src="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/bobimpact.gif"><br>
<a href="http://www.silentspic.com" target="_blank">Thanks, Slient Spic!</a></center>

[Steels]

DITTO Bobby Impact!

<img src=http://members.aol.com/vikorynotvengnce/images/steels2.gif>

[A.J.]

The preliminary test of a Theater Missile Defense System (The precursor to the NMD system) during the Gulf War was a horrendous failure.


Remember that the Patriot missile was originally designed as an anti-aircraft missile. It wasn't until a couple of years before the Gulf War that it was modified to counter a SRBM threat. So fielding this system during the war was as much R&D as it was operational. But, as you correctly pointed out, it serves as an example of why proper R&D is necessary before delivery. There's a reason why the DoD acquisition process takes so long.

Furthermore, the current system uses a laser to destroy the booster of an ICBM, which, depending on the time or interception could deflect itself into any number of places on the globe,


That's a proposed part of the system: the USAF's ABL (Airborne Laser). There are also planned land and sea-based assets.

He, like I, is not opposed to Researching a NMD or TMD system, however, this is not the current issue, the current issue is Bush's Hell or High Water declaration that the Pentagon have a system in place by '04. R&D is fine, deployment of an imperfect system is something else entirely.


I agree (see the Patriot example). My belief is that we ought to field a TMD system first. That's where the greatest threat is right now. We have a rather effective sea-based capability right now.

The most insulting thing I've heard about this system is Bush saying that it would help defend us if terrorists were to launch an ICBM (This is in the AP article).


I think that in this case Bush is concerned (rightly) about the lack of effective safeguards/command and control in some nations and the threat of "accidental" launch.

<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/ajdcsig.jpg">

A Skidmark production.

[Bob Impact]

My belief is that we ought to field a TMD system first.

If i'm not mistaken the PAT-3 TMD systems is showing good progress, but, again, this is for short range non ICBM strikes, not a serious NMD system.


<center><img src="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/bobimpact.gif"><br>
<a href="http://www.silentspic.com" target="_blank">Thanks, Slient Spic!</a></center>

[A.J.]

Yes. Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) systems will be used to intercept short and medium range ballistic missiles.


<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/ajdcsig.jpg">

A Skidmark production.

[Abrasive Dean]

That's a proposed part of the system: the USAF's ABL (Airborne Laser). There are also planned land and sea-based assets.


Mmmn that gives me a warm cosy feeling. Or is that simply more "friendly fire" but from an airborne laser this time. :)

<img src="http://homepage.mac.com/deanmcg/sig/Xmas2.jpg">

[A.J.]

Well, Sen. Lieberman likes the idea:

InsideDefense.com
December 18, 2002

Lieberman Applauds Bush Missile Defense Plan, Calls For More Money

Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) today broke with other party leaders by endorsing President Bush's new missile defense plans, urging the administration to commit more resources to ensure their success.

"Our first priority must be fighting terrorism, but the threat we face from ballistic missiles -- whether from rogue states or accidental launches -- is real and current," Lieberman said in a statement. "For that reason, I support the administration's decision, because some kind of missile defense system -- even a rudimentary one -- is better than no system at all. But the administration's plan is so limited at this point that it should not lull anyone into a false sense of security."

Bush yesterday announced his plan to deploy a limited national missile defense system in 2004, with upgrades and further technological advances -- including sea- and space-based defense technologies -- to be pursued and implemented as they mature.

The president's announcement was roundly criticized by Democrats including Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI), outgoing chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, who said Bush's plan "violates common sense by determining to deploy systems before they have been tested and shown to work.

"This deployment will do little to increase our national security," Levin said in a Dec. 17 statement. "With the exception of the Patriot system, which has been tested against theater ballistic missiles, the systems to be fielded will lack important components required for an effective defense. Neither the interceptor nor the radar to be used with the new national missile defense system has ever been tested against any ballistic missile target at all. Under the normal acquisition process for all weapons programs, we have insisted, until now, that systems be tested and demonstrated to be operationally effective before a deployment decision is made."

But Lieberman, considered a prime candidate to run for president in 2004, calls on the administration and Congress to "go the rest of the way" on missile defense. "Simply putting missile interceptors in the ground, as the administration proposes to do, won't by itself get the job done. A successful missile defense system requires adequate funding for radar, a command and control system to link the system's parts, and an effective testing program, among other critical investments," his statement reads.

Lieberman says the administration's "commitment to these essential components is not yet clear," noting a tax cut plan he says is "depleting our resources."

"I will be looking at President Bush's budget submission very clearly to see if our Defense Department is prepared to put our dollars where the danger is," the statement adds.

Lieberman concludes by stating that he will push the administration to use funds approved by Congress for an X-band radar system "that a successful missile defense system requires."

-- Daniel G. Dupont



<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/ajdcsig.jpg">

A Skidmark production.

[Bob Impact]

Lieberman is a prostitute.

<center><img src="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/bobimpact.gif"><br>
<a href="http://www.silentspic.com" target="_blank">Thanks, Slient Spic!</a></center>