• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

US missile defense to be operative in 2004.

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I think most of us agree that this system is just hot air and more a political tool that will make a good slogan next election. Billions will be flushed down the toilet and conversely, any nation/group who aspires to attack the US will likely save billions as ICBM technology is no longer required. "Enemies" of the US(those who might wanna nuke the US) will now likely focus on alternate delivery systems, which they likely have already anyway. The current NMD system proposed is nothing more than a security blanket laced with smallpox.
 
Anyways, this NMD will be deployed in 2004, no question politically motivated. Whether it will be operative in 2004 is another question.
We need this missile defense like a fish needs an umbrella. The terrorists outsmarted us because we are still stuck in cold war mentality, and they have already moved on. It's time we moved on too instead of regurgitating decades old ideas and trying to fit them into this new world.
 
How dare you imply our Commander in Chief would do anything for political gain! He's the greatest war time President ever! And even if NMD doesn't work this is a great jobs program and it will keep the defense industry flush with cash so they might build something that acutally works.
 
Silly, silly, silly.

Duck and cover made more sense and was cheaper. If someone made a reasonably good system, someone would make a better missle. I can think of several ways to make an ICBM much harder to take out, and that is not my field of expertise. Yes it would add to the cost of missles, but for a miminal investment, it would make hundreds of billions of dollars of defense worthless. For a trillion bucks and a few decades research, you might be overcome my ideas, but then someone else who is really good could come out with something else.
 
U.S., Japan Share Labor in Approach to N.Korea
...
In response to the danger they see from North Korea's nuclear and missile programs, the Japanese side embraced the offer of U.S. assistance with a missile defense system.

"The ministers acknowledged the need to continue current U.S.-Japan cooperative research on ballistic missile defense technologies and to intensify consultation and cooperation on missile defense," the statement said.
...

E'nuff said.

 
Originally posted by: etech
U.S., Japan Share Labor in Approach to N.Korea ... In response to the danger they see from North Korea's nuclear and missile programs, the Japanese side embraced the offer of U.S. assistance with a missile defense system. "The ministers acknowledged the need to continue current U.S.-Japan cooperative research on ballistic missile defense technologies and to intensify consultation and cooperation on missile defense," the statement said. ... E'nuff said.
Click to expand...

Great! Too bad one does not exist. Call me in a hundred years.
 
As others have said the technology is not there yet and their tests were conducted under very strict parameters and they knew precisely where the incoming missiles originated, how fast they went, etc. It's wasteful to deploy something that doesn't work for obvious reasons.

Sadly, the future looks likely to bring missile attacks our way so eventually we will need this capability.
 
Originally posted by: JellyBaby
As others have said the technology is not there yet and their tests were conducted under very strict parameters and they knew precisely where the incoming missiles originated, how fast they went, etc. It's wasteful to deploy something that doesn't work for obvious reasons.

Sadly, the future looks likely to bring missile attacks our way so eventually we will need this capability.
Click to expand...

It is not to just defend against a missile attack but to defend against the blackmail of a possible missile attack. Think about it.

 
If North Korea is just NOW getting the ability to create a nulcear warhead, how many more years will it be until they can launch ICBMs? That's about two decades ahead of nuclear warheads in the first place. Wouldn't it be far more likely they'd just sneak it aboard a plane or a suitcase or something?

Do you ever read the news or remember world events of a few years' back? Perhaps you should do some research on the Taepo Dong missile which was successfully launched over Japan in 1998.

2) As far as I know, there have been no successful tests of this missile defense when the intercepting missile wasn't programed where to go.

Incorrect. Several of the tests were designed to show that a hit-to-kill vehicle would actually destroy an incoming warhead. Subsequent tests have shown that the guidance and warhead discrimination system works without preprogrammed aids (ie., "rigging"). The latest failure (after FOUR consecutive successful tests) was unrelated to either and the result of something rather minor and easily remedied.

Dari, they've worked 3 out of 8 times in rigged tests. If our choice was NMD or no defense it might make sense if it was at least cost effective. This system doesn't work and it is expensive even by DOD standards.

It's nice that you can manufacture your facts, but the reality is that it's worked 4 times out of the last 5 and has proven the capability of the system to work. I believe the total is 5 intercepts out of 8 tests. Since this system is still in the testing stage and involves radical new technology, some test failures are perfectly acceptable and expected. Did the first heavier than air aircraft takeoff in the first iteration? Hardly.

hitting a missile with a beam of intensified light is better since you know INSTANTLY whether u hit it or not

You just have to worry about those pesky things called "clouds".

What kind of moron would send a nuke missile at the US knowing that we would vaporize the country where it's fired from if they can just stick it in a container and blow it up in a port.

The same kind of moron who would expect that the U.S. would be less than eager to obliterate an entire country with a billion plus people in it, for instance, for one missile "accidentally" launched when the political repercussions of the WWII bombs still lingers on despite the fact that fewer people died there than in some bombing raids on Germany and Britain earlier in the war. Further, a leader such as Kim Chong-il doesn't particularly care what happens to his people, and massive relatialition against another country won't raise the dead Americans smouldering after a nuclear detonation on American soil.

That's like a police officer not wearing his kevlar vest because if he's shot, then his fellow officers are going to shoot the perpetrator. Given the choice, I'll wear the vest.
 
Originally posted by: LordSegan[/i
We ABSOLUTELY do not need a missile defense system by 2004, 2005, 2006... etc. MAYBE we need one by 2012 or 2015.
Click to expand...



Well if we might need one by 2015, I am glad we started working on it now,since everyone thinks it is an impossible task.
 
Originally posted by: AndrewR

What kind of moron would send a nuke missile at the US knowing that we would vaporize the country where it's fired from if they can just stick it in a container and blow it up in a port.

The same kind of moron who would expect that the U.S. would be less than eager to obliterate an entire country with a billion plus people in it, for instance, for one missile "accidentally" launched when the political repercussions of the WWII bombs still lingers on despite the fact that fewer people died there than in some bombing raids on Germany and Britain earlier in the war. Further, a leader such as Kim Chong-il doesn't particularly care what happens to his people, and massive relatialition against another country won't raise the dead Americans smouldering after a nuclear detonation on American soil.

That's like a police officer not wearing his kevlar vest because if he's shot, then his fellow officers are going to shoot the perpetrator. Given the choice, I'll wear the vest.
Click to expand...

So why are we deploying them in Alaska, and not Hawaii or Guam, wouldn't that be a better place to shoot down nukes from Korea and China? Bush is still fighting the Cold War with a nonexistent Soviet Union.
 
I must admit . . . I made mistake. During the previous $100B spent on NMD they hit nothing . . . total failure. Over the last 8 tests they've scored 5 hits and as AndrewR notes 4 of the last 5. I stand corrected . . . take a picture . . . it won't happen again.
 
Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
I must admit . . . I made mistake. During the previous $100B spent on NMD they hit nothing . . . total failure. Over the last 8 tests they've scored 5 hits and as AndrewR notes 4 of the last 5. I stand corrected . . . take a picture . . . it won't happen again.
Click to expand...

So do you fault the wright brothers for not inventing a 747 on the first pass?
 
Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
I must admit . . . I made mistake. During the previous $100B spent on NMD they hit nothing . . . total failure. Over the last 8 tests they've scored 5 hits and as AndrewR notes 4 of the last 5. I stand corrected . . . take a picture . . . it won't happen again.
Click to expand...

Doesnt matter. These tests do not take into account the fact that offensive technology changes as rapidly, and indeed I would think moreso here, as defensive. I would wager that for every hundred billion dollars spent on defense, one billion dollars or less will defeat it.
 
So do you fault the wright brothers for not inventing a 747 on the first pass?
Click to expand...

Damn . . . kick a dude when he's down. I blame the Wright Brothers for mucking up a perfectly good sand dune to glide an ugly kite!
 
Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
So do you fault the wright brothers for not inventing a 747 on the first pass?
Click to expand...

Damn . . . kick a dude when he's down. I blame the Wright Brothers for mucking up a perfectly good sand dune to glide an ugly kite!
Click to expand...

Sorry about that, I misread your post.
 
Doesnt matter. These tests do not take into account the fact that offensive technology changes as rapidly, and indeed I would think moreso here, as defensive. I would wager that for every hundred billion dollars spent on defense, one billion dollars or less will defeat it.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter b/c we are going to kill them before they can spend the billion dollars.

Well except for China but they need us to buy their crap so they won't bomb any time soon.

And the Russians, but they are just playa haters . . . and they don't have a billion dollars.

Now the Saudi royals have a lot of money but they are just simple, peaceloving people being maligned by American neoconservatives and almost all of the Saudi citizenry.
 
It is not to just defend against a missile attack but to defend against the blackmail of a possible missile attack. Think about it.
Click to expand...
I highly doubt that's of any significance. When's the last time the nation has been blackmailed?
 
Actually North Korea does it constantly. The South treats them like the crazy ne'er do well uncle who drinks, can't keep a job, and always wants to borrow money.

The Japanese have reason to be worried b/c well you know that whole invasion, occupation, Comfort Women thing . . .
 
Originally posted by: JellyBaby
It is not to just defend against a missile attack but to defend against the blackmail of a possible missile attack. Think about it.
Click to expand...
I highly doubt that's of any significance. When's the last time the nation has been blackmailed?
Click to expand...

Maybe not black mail, but a first strike from a rougue nation will require a lot more work at this point. And by the time the system is 100% foolproof, I am going to guess ICBM technology is going to be alot more prevalent that today.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top