US BMD getting better all the time...

GhostFox

GhostFox

Newbie
Joined
Feb 6, 2005
Messages
796
Reaction score
0
Razor said:
Isn't Europe, or the United Kingdom anyway, going to be part of Star Wars 2?

And i think Europe is more of a diplomacy orietated people rather than shoot the buggers till their brains seep through their arses type people.

A truely victories battle is one won without combat.
Click to expand...

Europe has been one of the most wartorn and violent areas of history. This is just a brief peace period :cheese:
 
I dunno, I think we finally learnt that losing generations really isn't good for us. Still, the UK is part of this plan, so uh, yay for my ability and freedom to spam Kim Jong with "nuke me 4 free movies" emails.
 
Kangy said:
I dunno, I think we finally learnt that losing generations really isn't good for us. Still, the UK is part of this plan, so uh, yay for my ability and freedom to spam Kim Jong with "nuke me 4 free movies" emails.
Click to expand...


He will just invite all the world leaders to a peace summit in PyongYang hosted by himself and the members of f.a.g. (Film Actors Guild).
 
good news, i wonder what Kim Jong thinks about this..

can imagine him ranting in his chair like a 5 year old :D haha
 
KoreBolteR said:
good news, i wonder what Kim Jong thinks about this..

can imagine him ranting in his chair like a 5 year old :D haha
Click to expand...


Lol, i can imagine the same thing from George Bush junior :).
 
Cool, but we europeans are just going to live in peace with the rest of the world and spend that money on social security so that in 20 yeasr we won't be a third world country like the US.
 
GhostFox said:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=585&e=5&u=/nm/20050225/sc_nm/arms_missile_usa_dc




This is good news for anyone living in NA.

*Note to Europe: Don't tick off NK. :laugh:
Click to expand...

well that's nice ..but since you're .....canadian you'd know that we've backed out of the missle defense plan


It seems like a big waste of money that could probably better spent nation building for the worlds poor ..but instead we throw our money away on "perceived threats" When's the last time a ballastic missle was aimed at america? I thought it was a war on terrorism? you dont need missle defense shields to ward off terrorists. 9/11 proved low tech can produce results
 
CptStern said:
well that's nice ..but since you're .....canadian you'd know that we've backed out of the missle defense plan


It seems like a big waste of money that could probably better spent nation building for the worlds poor ..but instead we throw our money away on "perceived threats" When's the last time a ballastic missle was aimed at america? I thought it was a war on terrorism? you dont need missle defense shields to ward off terrorists. 9/11 proved low tech can produce results
Click to expand...

Do you really need to call his nationality into question in every post you make? I think he was saying that the US wouldnt just let a missle fly into Canada if it ever came to that. Furthermore, with NK emerging as a real threat armed with ballistic missles, this program could prove to be a real positive. Better deal with it now then rush to create one five years down the road when a new threat emerges. I knew that someone was going to whine about how the US is greedily spending its own money, but I wanted to see who it would be first.
 
interesting, defensively useful, but i want to know how effective response times would be considering how they responded before, when they let not one, but two airplanes which are 20 times larger and travel way slower, into the New york city scape area at low altitudes. If theres a repeat performance of that response time (which boggles my mind) then id say its pretty useless.
 
interesting, defensively useful, but i want to know how effective response times would be considering how they responded before, when they let not one, but two airplanes which are 20 times larger and travel way slower, into the New york city scape area at low altitudes. If theres a repeat performance of that response time (which boggles my mind) then id say its pretty useless.
Click to expand...

1.) There is no response time for the planes during 9/11. The airports are in the cities, so it would have been impossible to shoot them down in time even with this, or any, system in place.

2.) This is the year 2005, not 2001. Were the systems in place then? No. Are they now? No. Its all still in testing.
 
try telling that to the thousands of people's relatives who lost their lives in those building's on that day. and from reports it was a 45 minute window from the time the first plane went off course, to tracking the second plane, there's no excuse for that, plain and simple, chain of command failing, or people failing to do there jobs over that period of time, as an excuse, isnt good enough.
 
try telling that to the thousands of people's relatives who lost their lives in those building's on that day. and from reports it was a 45 minute window from the time the first plane went off course, to tracking the second plane, there's no excuse for that, plain and simple, chain of command failing, or people failing to do there jobs over that period of time, as an excuse, isnt good enough.
Click to expand...
How should they have known it was a terrorist attack? Who knew that the pilots didnt fall asleep and the plane didnt drift off course? I remember watching the event live and there were millions of possibilites being thrown around. It only became a clear terrorist attack after the second plane hit.
 
well that's nice ..but since you're .....canadian you'd know that we've backed out of the missle defense plan
Click to expand...

Actually that still has not been determined. Our great Ditherer, Mr. Martin, has publicly stated that Canada will not participate, while private documents show that Canada will. There is some speculation that the whole not participating is just a public front to mollify the liberals. It could be some time before it is resolved. Regardless, everyone in Canada lives on top of the US border, so even if the US wanted to let us get nuked, they couldn't because it would hurt the US too.

On a scary note they reported in the NP that 1 year ago 70% of Canadians supported BMD. After an intensive anti-BMD campaign by the Liberals, 65% of Canadians are against it. I wonder if they use one of those spinning disc things for their brainwashing.
 
seinfeldrules said:
How should they have known it was a terrorist attack? Who knew that the pilots didnt fall asleep and the plane didnt drift off course? I remember watching the event live and there were millions of possibilites being thrown around. It only became a clear terrorist attack after the second plane hit.
Click to expand...

dont know about people in general, but the military should of had a sharper eye on what was happening, air defence would of immediately be warned when the planes even left their projected flight path, at that moment if contact cant be made, and the planes are still in a controlled flight, NORAD would be told to scramble jets... didnt happen.

unless the military completely lost control of the situation, they must of realised the first plane hit wasnt a fluke :dozey: , and would of defiantely had the second plane on radar, going in the same direction. defence was seemingly un-operational, for NORAD who are probably the most aware of possible threats , they claim 8 minute response times for scrambling jets , the event occured in the most heavily guarded airspace on the planet. It seemed neglected, but people where in such shock, they didnt blink an eye lid of thought about where defence was. it should of been there as a precaution, and they had ample time to react tracking both planes heading in i dentical directions.. pilots falling asleep and veering off course accurately into a building? lol, if both pilot and co pilot fell asleep just after take off, autopilot would of kept them on the intended course. or else they would of just spun to the ground.

theres no excuse, the answers arnt thourough enough to be acceptable.
 
By GhostFox:
On a scary note they reported in the NP that 1 year ago 70% of Canadians supported BMD. After an intensive anti-BMD campaign by the Liberals, 65% of Canadians are against it. I wonder if they use one of those spinning disc things for their brainwashing.
__________________
Click to expand...

All the liberlas have to do is increase the avrage IQ of the people to gte more support, it seems they succeded.
 
unless the military completely lost control of the situation, they must of realised the first plane hit wasnt a fluke , and would of defiantely had the second plane on radar, going in the same direction.
Click to expand...

Do you think there was only 1 other plane heading to NYC at the time? Are you proposing they should have shot down every airplane with that heading.

pilots falling asleep and veering off course accurately into a building? lol, if both pilot and co pilot fell asleep just after take off, autopilot would of kept them on the intended course. or else they would of just spun to the ground.
Click to expand...
That was only 1 of a million possible scenarios.
 
All the liberlas have to do is increase the avrage IQ of the people to gte more support, it seems they succeded.
Click to expand...

Of course. God forbid you actually shoot down a missle coming at you. You are 100% right. It is much better to let a major city be nuked. What could I have been thinking?
 
Ballastic missile defence systems are nothing new, nor are the defences the icbm use to combat them. That is why icbms moved from the large singular warhead used in the 50's and 60's to the multiple warhead system used when the ballastic missile system was first tested. That means that the missile would need to shoot down the icbm before deploying the 6 - 10 warheads, i.e. in space, or fire as many anti-missile missiles are you possible can, to not only take out warheads, but also the numerous decays and the falling casing of the icbm itself.

GhostFox said:
There are lasers! :D

http://www.mindfully.org/Technology/2004/Star-Wars-Missile19sep04.htm
Click to expand...

The Airbourne Laser System can only be used to target scud missiles and icbms when they are first launched and they must be within a certain range of the launch site. I have never heard of the abl being able to shoot down a warhead of missile when it was already falling towards it's target.
 
it has failed over half of the time :p

Although I am for the program. But a multilateral one (including Russia, etc.)
 
The Soviet Union started developing them years ago.
And the USA did some research but couldn't get them to work as well as the Russians "the sums just didn't add up", so they pressed the Russians to not develop them.
The Russians argued it was purely defensive "It is just like an umbrella, when it rains we shield ourselves"
But the Americans argued that the Russians would be able to attack the USA without fear of a counterstrike.

But I think there was a treaty signed (and recently broken) to not develop missle shields, and the idea went down the toilet because of the development of MIRVs - single missles with multiple Warheads + lots of decoys.
Missle shields were very expensive compared to MIRVs, and you would need 20 anti missles for each missle. It just wasn't practical.

As for the modern system, maybe it will protect well against the odd missle thrown out by a crackpot regime, but it's not going to do much against full nuclear states with MIRVs and loads of missles.
And if it did, I think that would give the USA the opportunity to nuke everyone without the fear of remorse.
[SARCASM]Could happen![/SARCASM]

A multilateral one would be good I agree. I mean, why not give everyone the ability to defend themselves (except your crackpot dictators, obviously)
 
CptStern said:
well that's nice ..but since you're .....canadian you'd know that we've backed out of the missle defense plan


It seems like a big waste of money that could probably better spent nation building for the worlds poor ..but instead we throw our money away on "perceived threats" When's the last time a ballastic missle was aimed at america? I thought it was a war on terrorism? you dont need missle defense shields to ward off terrorists. 9/11 proved low tech can produce results
Click to expand...

We? Canada decided not to invest in missle defense. What's this we stuff? lol

And now you're for Nation building??? Did someone take over Stern's account? (j/k)

I don't agree with hardly any of the spending done by the Feds but Defense is its job. As I understand it though, even with a succesful test, it's a very very long way off from being able to work.

And if we're going to do it with Lasers they better be strapped to sharks... LOL
 
Razor said:
Lol, i can imagine the same thing from George Bush junior :).
Click to expand...

why?, because he has just strengthened his defence against nukes from evil countries, that want to kill innocent people?

celebrating imo. :p
 
I like this idea, but only if any nation with the funds can at least try and build something like this. I know it's unlike me to agree with the facist pig dog Conservatives (I kid, I kid ;) ), but this kind of thing actually makes sense to me.

Removing the threat of nuclear weapons = good. As are lazers.
 
Kangy said:
Removing the threat of nuclear weapons = good.
Click to expand...

Don't forget though, doing this might provoke attacks before the system works completely. (which there is a pretty good window for, considering the track record of it)

Does noone know of the cold war stressball that came out of Reagan's SDI?
The whole reason we never had a nuclear war was because of deterence; and when the SDI was around, it meant the end of that factor- the USSR basically had to decide whether to let the Americans take complete control nuclear-wise, or attack before they lost the chance to do so in future. (luckily, the Russians decided to give it a little more time, and then ran out of cash before they came to review the situation, at which point, the SDI was pretty dead anyway)

Thats not going to happen now, but think about countries like NK- if they loose the sabre-rattling/threat benefits of nuclear weapons (because they can be knocked out of the air), then why not use them right now, before they become obsolete?
After (if) a BMD is up, ICBMs will be useless, and they will have lost.
 
It's not really going to stop the terrorists either, who would probably have no ability to deliver a nuke except by hand.
 
kirovman said:
It's not really going to stop the terrorists either, who would probably have no ability to deliver a nuke except by hand.
Click to expand...

Big, expensive, lots of fancy parts.. but ultimately isn't equally as useful.. e-penis points then? :p
 
It's not really going to stop the terrorists either, who would probably have no ability to deliver a nuke except by hand.
Click to expand...

True, but right now there are two doors to hit NA with nukes.

Door #1 is an ICBM from a place like Iran or NK when they develop them enough to hit NA. Not that far off for NK probably.

Door #2 is a terrorist group delivering a nuke on a container ship or such. Why it is theoretically possible for this to happen at any time, experts in counter terrorism usually say that it will be decades before nuclear technology is at the point where individual groups will have realistic access to it.

Now I agree that both need to be guarded against, but the US hasn't opened door #2, it has only closed door #1. Once the system is in place more efforts can be put into closeing door #2. And the US govt. has run the numbers. It is much more likely that NK will have a nuke capable of hitting the US before a terrorist group has the means to buy/make and deliver one.

I also hope that the US openly shares BMD technology with other nations. It's not like it could ever stop an attack from the US/Russia anyway. It is a system desiegned to take down 1 rogue missile, not 2 dozen death's heads (bonus points to all who get the reference without googling it).
 
GhostFox said:
True, but right now there are two doors to hit NA with nukes.
Click to expand...

What about Door #3? One manufactured inside the country?

GhostFox said:
It is a system desiegned to take down 1 rogue missile, not 2 dozen death's heads (bonus points to all who get the reference without googling it).
Click to expand...

I know that reference, but I can't remember from where... :o

EDIT: is it from one of those cannon games?
 
You make nukes sound like a bad thing. Hell, when the nukes come this way i'll be dancin naked in the garden, with my matrix shades on of course.

Bring it on.
 
Grey Fox said:
Cool, but we europeans are just going to live in peace with the rest of the world and spend that money on social security so that in 20 yeasr we won't be a third world country like the US.
Click to expand...
Thanks for admitting that bush is right :)

By the way, the United States' GDP dwarfs your whole continents, lets not get to talking about third world countries here. Im sure you all were talking as arrogantly as you do now as you did before WW2... or WW1, living in peace wiith everybody... what a crock of shit. I'm sure Spain was thinking that too as bombs ripped through their trains. Wake up.

Anyway, the more missile defense the better. I doubt this will inspire an attack by NK, because I view them as more of a bargaining tool for NK. I think we are totally justified in this.
 
gh0st said:
I'm sure Spain was thinking that too as bombs ripped through their trains. Wake up.

.
Click to expand...

dont go down that road gh0st, I voted in that election I'll expose your misinformation for what it is
 
gh0st said:
I view them as more of a bargaining tool for NK.
Click to expand...

If the US will bring a missile shield to the table, NK won't have anything to balance it with.
NK won't bother trying to negotiate when they have no bargaining power themselves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

thenerdguy
TheNerdNews: Scientists Find Soft Tissue in T-Rex Bone
Replies
3
Views
969
Datrix
Datrix
thenerdguy
TheNerdNews :Dead Jockey Rides to Victory
Replies
8
Views
1K
thenerdguy
thenerdguy
Back
Top