[ionia23]

Read this

Now it gets ugly.  You watch the response to this.

[Blitzerland]

Frankly, I view this as good news. What's wrong with the U.S. having a way of actually PROTECTING ourselves from missles?

I live there...and I really don't want to get hit by an ICBM...

[Rictor]

The response? What, laughter?

They don't even bother to make their lies plausbile anymore. They might as well have said they have a base on the moon that can shoot lasers at the sun.

[aldo_14]

So now all the short range nukes are aimed at thevital US  radar station being installed in the UK?

(nice one, Tony)

[Blitzerland]

Umm...it is very plausible. It launches missles to intercept other missles launched at us. What is so impossible about that?

[Rictor]

No, the missle shield is a pipe dream thats been "very near completion" since Reagan's time. There are major problems with the design and implementation which why most US physicists have condemnded it.

If they actually have the damn thing operational, I'll grow wings and fly up to intercept any missles myself. Its bull****, an attempt to boost Bush's popularity before the elections. In the absence of Big O, (and we'll soon see if he really is absent) this is their October Surprise.

[Flipside]

What amazes me is that billions of dollars have been spent on a non-threat. At the end of the day, the threat to the American people doesn't come from ICBM's etc, it's come from Dirty Bombs and poison gas smuggled in tiny amounts through airports etc.

I can assure you the Osama's $30 million pound fortune does not even begin to run to the cost of buying even a single Intercontinental Ballistic Missile, let alone the payload, launch platform etc, and no other Nuke-nation, except possibly that nutcase in N.Korea would even consider launching a Nuke at the US. It would be like throwing a snowball at an Avalanche.

[ionia23]

Maybe I ought to clarify why this is bad.

Rictor might very well be right, that it's all a bunch of hooey.  I honestly hope it is.

Yes, in thought being able to defend against a missle strike is a good thing, as the only current defense to all-out nuclear conflict is deterrence.  Great policy.  Yeah.  As long as you're fighting an enemy who actually gives a damn about surviving.

Think about this a moment, assuming the system actually works.  I see two BAD things coming out of this:

1.  Iran.  If this current administration gets re-elected (Bush and company), Georgie Porgie's next target will be Iran.  If the Iranians proceed with a nuke program, this administration would be just stupid enough to strongarm them.  "We fear not your weapons which you probably haven't built anyway".  Likewise for North Korea.  Think about the physical, financial, and emotional damage of the 9/11 attacks over here.  Compared to a 5 megaton detonation over a city.  Hell, detonated in near space (EMP burst), the 9/11 attacks weren't diddly ****.  We just might finally piss someone off enough to fire first.

(Qualifier: I have no issues with Iran at all, and I think giving them a hard time about things is extremely ****ed up.)

I'm also of the opinion that we are greatly underestimating the Russian response.  Greatly.

2.  If this defense system is even 95% efficient, it just might 'spook' one of the other members of the nuclear family into firing first under the principle that if they don't launch now, they'll never have an opportunity.

This system, if it works, represents a major shift in the balance of nuclear powers.  

Maybe I'm hyping it, but this is also how WWIII started in Whitley Strieber's "War Day".  25 years later than it took place in the book, but damned near the same.

[Ford Prefect]

You have to understand that this Star Wars bull**** started out as some kind of ludicrous publicity stunt proposed by Reagan. Since then, it has had a long, distinguished history of being total bull****. For its entire lifetime, the people who know what they're talking about have almost universally assessed it as being a long shot at best. It is a waste of time and tax money, and it is a testament to the simplistic worship of science as an omnipotent god.

EDIT: Now redundant. People posted like crazy.

[Shrike]

DON'T **** WITH SCIENCE!

Oh, and remind me to stab Maeglamor for the censor.  

[Liberator]

Rictor, you're funny.  

The reason "it's been very near completion since Reagan's time" is twofold.  One, the processing tech has not been developed until recently and, two, we haven't had an interceptor missile capable of reaching and stopping an ICBM until recently.  Also, you should be happy about this, given that it's going to protect Canada too.

Also, in every poll I've seen or heard Bush is 5-10 points ahead of Kerry except in Lefty-Wacko areas.  

Would you really want that...tit...as the leader of your country Rictor?  

All he has is secret plans which he won't reveal until he's elected.  Bush on the other hand has visible, well documented agendas that everyone knows about.

[Rictor]

But see, there really *are* no ICBM threats to the US anymore. The Cold War is over guys, like it or not. Several hundred billion dollars, for what? To guard against an single, untested ICBM that North Korea may or may not (in all likelyhood, not) have and that they may or may not use (again, not)? Want security? Already have it, better than virtually any nation on Earth. Still not satisfied? Station guards at your ports, put in better detection measures at airports and that sort of thing. Oh wait, you already have. Most of the world has more reason to fear for its safety than America, but I don't see them deploying billion dollar pea-shooters and buying up duct-tape.

If you want to talk about WW3, consider what happens if/when Israel decides to take out Iran's potential nuclear program, ala Osirak. ****storm baby, thats what. And thats MUCH more probable than anyone lobbing an ICBM at America, in fact I would go so far to say that it is actually likely.

[Ford Prefect]

All he has is secret plans which he won't reveal until he's elected. Bush on the other hand has visible, well documented agendas that everyone knows about.

Yes, and knowing what his agendas are, I think I'll take my chances with the unknown. Although one might dispute the "well-documented" part.

The missile defense system is going to protect jack ****. It doesn't work and it never has worked. During some of the tests, they were actually putting electronic tracking devices on the missiles. It's a complete waste of our money.

[Shrike]

Originally posted by Liberator
two, we haven't had an interceptor missile capable of reaching and stopping an ICBM until recently.

That's factually incorrect.  Cold War era systems could easily intercept ICBMs... the difference is that they used (often large) nukes to accomplish kills.  They were designs to protect vital areas in case of an all-out nuclear war, not defend against a possible limited strike and as such could afford to use nuclear warheads.

Look up the Sprint missile.  The damn thing pulls over one hundred gees during launch.  It's an awesome piece of engineering.

[Kazan]

Liberator: if you think that the this system would get anything near reliable then you're a fool and know nothing about the basic laws of physics

[aldo_14]

Unfortunately(?), most people outside the US are against Bush exactly because his agendas are well documented.

Anyway, didn't this miracle interceptor missile fail its testing pretty miserably a few years back?  With the tests being faked?

Lib - are 'lefty-wacko' areas wacko because you disagree with their politics?  (presumably they result to tactics like calling Bush, etc, tits or something)

Oh, and that defense system doesn't cover the UK.  So like **** we should let them build an early warning radar station for it here - might as well replace the clock face of Big Ben with a bullseye while we're at it.

[Kazan]

Originally posted by aldo_14

Oh, and that defense system doesn't cover the UK.  So like **** we should let them build an early warning radar station for it here - might as well replace the clock face of Big Ben with a bullseye while we're at it.

[Rictor]

Originally posted by Liberator
Rictor, you're funny.  

The reason "it's been very near completion since Reagan's time" is twofold.  One, the processing tech has not been developed until recently and, two, we haven't had an interceptor missile capable of reaching and stopping an ICBM until recently.  Also, you should be happy about this, given that it's going to protect Canada too.

Also, in every poll I've seen or heard Bush is 5-10 points ahead of Kerry except in Lefty-Wacko areas.  

Would you really want that...tit...as the leader of your country Rictor?  

All he has is secret plans which he won't reveal until he's elected.  Bush on the other hand has visible, well documented agendas that everyone knows about.

1. So, I guess Left-Wacko areas include most major cities, right? That arguement makes no sense. You could just as well as that every poll I've seen indicates that Kerry leads Bush except in Rightist-Wacko areas. Kerry leads where Kerry leads, Bush leads where Bush leads.  You just said it in a different way.

2. No, I would not want Kerry as my President. But not for the reasons you think. I wouldn;t want him because he is a jingoist, a imperialist and I agree with virtually none of his policies.

3. Canada will likely not be a part of the missle shield. All major parties are against it, and it has become a topic of near-unanimous public condemnation. Even Steven Harper, the leader of the Conservatives and perhaps the most US-friendly politican in Canada does not support it.

4. Read my above post. There is no threat of ICBM. I shudder to think what good could have been done with that money, instead of lining the pockets of defence-tech corporations on a project that will not only not work, but that is unecessary in the first place.

[vyper]

Giving the US this protection if it works is like giving a megalomaniac a gun and a star trek shield that will defend him against any enemy fire.

Besides which it's a joke - they've had less than a 20% success rate in tests of the system.

[Rictor]

Yeah, this whole discussion is pointless, since the chances of them actually having it done are so small. Of course, they can just say its done and people will believe it, and -boom- instant ratings boost.

And when no one attacks, they just say how thats because its workings so perfectly.

Read my lips: nothing-to-worry-about-cause-there-is-no-missle-shield-and-everyone-knows-it