As we knew all along... Missile Shield is a boondoggle

[The diplomat]

Re: Re: Re: As we knew all along... Missile Shield is a boondoggle

Originally posted by Boris Godunov

Did you read at all, or are you just stupid? IT DOESN'T WORK.

If it doesn't work, it's a WASTE OF MONEY.

It's supposed to begin implementation Sept. 30. This isn't some far off, future date. It's this year, and the thing has ZERO ability to do what it is supposed to do.

How is something that DOESN'T WORK prevent NK from nuking us?

YOU ARE DEAD WRONG!

We have had several successful hits. The Israelis have tested a laser system that succesfully destroyed an incoming rocket. These successes prove that a missile shield CAN work. We just need to continue to work on it.

The technology may not be perfect but does that mean we should give up and not even try to implement a missile shield?

That is the biggest gripe I have with you and the authors of that report. You dismiss the successes and just focus on the failures and say "it does not work so we should give up and not even try to make it work". That is ridiculous! Imagine if the Wright Brothers had given up after their first failed attempt and said "powered flight does not work, let's give up".

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Caligastia

Too late Cali.

[Urban Ranger]

Re: Re: Re: Re: As we knew all along... Missile Shield is a boondoggle

Originally posted by The diplomat
We have had several successful hits.

You mean the ones that with enormous balloons tie to the warhead that advertise its location, with no decoy, and with launch time and location precisely known in advance?

And not that even work 100% of the time.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Agathon


Too late Cali.

I don't see any other Gauls posted here...

[The diplomat]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: As we knew all along... Missile Shield is a boondoggle

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


You mean the ones that with enormous balloons tie to the warhead that advertise its location, with no decoy, and with launch time and location precisely known in advance?

And not that even work 100% of the time.

There were also tests done under realistic conditions. The tests were successful about 50% of the time, IIRC.

Whether it is 50%, 20% or 60%, some success is better than none. It shows the technology is possible. And I don't know about you, if a nuclear missile were heading towards my city, I'd prefer even 10% chance over 0%. Not building a missile defense guarantees a 0% chance of survival.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Caligastia



I don't see any other Gauls posted here...

In the "Bush is a crackhead" thread. That's where the Gaul thing comes from.

[General Ludd]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: As we knew all along... Missile Shield is a boondoggle

Originally posted by The diplomat


There were also tests done under realistic conditions. The tests were successful about 50% of the time, IIRC.

Whether it is 50%, 20% or 60%, some success is better than none. It shows the technology is possible. And I don't know about you, if a nuclear missile were heading towards my city, I'd prefer even 10% chance over 0%.

I'd rather be at ground zero than have to live post-apocalypse.

[Agathon]

This is pretty funny. Conservatives rant on about the wastage of taxpayers' money but they don't really care about the money. They just don't want more money to go to poor people. Socialism for the rich is fine by them.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Agathon
This is pretty funny. Conservatives rant on about the wastage of taxpayers' money but they don't really care about the money. They just don't want more money to go to poor people. Socialism for the rich is fine by them.

Exactly... conservatives love wasting money on defense projects that will probably never work.

Yes, for missile shield technology to work we shouldn't give up... but that doesn't mean we need to keep flushing billions down the ****ing toilet.

And seriously... do we even need a missile shield? I think MAD is doing a good job. I think a missile defense would be bad because it would force other countries to find other ways to threaten America. If America gets the upper hand on missile defense, other countries will find a way to defeat the system.

And realistically, I'm not concerned about missiles... I'm concerned about some terrorist with a suitcase nuke. What is to defend against that?

If we're going to spend money on defense, it should be in areas that need it! And missile defense isn't a pressing need. Defense against terrorism is.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
I wonder if the ancestors of these scientists were the ones that said a rocket to the moon won't work.

The truth is no doubt around halfway between UCS Chicken Little view, and the DoD's Pie in the Sky view. Unless someone's dumb enough to flip a ballistic nuke at us, we'll never really know anything more than who got how much corporate pork.

The published test reports show that the thing is piss-poor.

[chequita guevara]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: As we knew all along... Missile Shield is a boondoggle

Originally posted by The diplomat
There were also tests done under realistic conditions.

Those were the ones that failed.

Seriously, did you not read the article? All of the tests were "highly controlled." This program isn't designed to defend the U.S. It's designed to give Raytheon $50 billion dollars.

Anyway, let's conduct a little wargame, shall we?

You get a working missile defense system. I get a nuke. Defend yourself!

I put my nuke on a fishing boat and sail it into L.A. BOOM! You lose.

[Boris Godunov]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: As we knew all along... Missile Shield is a boondoggle

Originally posted by The diplomat
There were also tests done under realistic conditions. The tests were successful about 50% of the time, IIRC.

And I suppose you can produce a source for this? Because the scientists noted that the Pentagon's numbers seemed to be pulled from their collective asses.

The government is spending $53 billion to implement a system that doesn't work, and you're fine with it. Yet I'm sure you're the first to complain about your tax dollars going to fund welfare programs, SS, education, etc. This is proof positive of the idiotic thinking of the right wing in this country.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: As we knew all along... Missile Shield is a boondoggle

Originally posted by The diplomat


There were also tests done under realistic conditions. The tests were successful about 50% of the time, IIRC.

Whether it is 50%, 20% or 60%, some success is better than none. It shows the technology is possible. And I don't know about you, if a nuclear missile were heading towards my city, I'd prefer even 10% chance over 0%. Not building a missile defense guarantees a 0% chance of survival.

You assume that anybody dumb enough to flip a ballistic missile at us is also dumb enough to only flip one at a given target area. That violates ballistic missle doctrine established on both sides of the cold war.

You also assume that anyone with the ability, the materiel, and the intent to nuke us would still use a ballistic missile, as opposed to buying any one of dozens of ex-Soviet SSGN's, including some of the old conventional powered ones, or using short range missiles, or using air-launched medium range missiles. None of those systems are even addressed by the so-called missle shield.

The futility of the missile shield isn't whether or not it would work, it's the fact that it is far cheaper and faster to reconfigure an offensive nuclear threat than it is to deploy a defensive system that's only capable of handling one type of threat.

[Shogun Gunner]

Let's not forget about the multitude of technology spin-offs that will emerge from this research and development.

Although I'm not for corporate welfare, let's not forget that Raytheon is a great American company which is responsible for providing leading information technolology, military technology, and space technology for many years.

[:) Smiley]

North Korea: My words are backed by NUCULAR WEAPONS!
Bush: Whoop dee doo.