Obama Ready to Drop Missile Defense Shield Plans for Russian Help with Iran

[Abominable Gorilla]

Really? Why don't you explain why the system would work on the one and only live test, and what counter measures you would take if you were attacking a MDS system.

The initial problem is that there are technologies of which you are not aware.

But, if we're going to limit our conversation to missile to missile intercept, there are numerous tests which have shown we're pretty good at it. Missile to missile intercept might not like saturation, but the countries that have that capability also know we have the same capability.

If you want to get a nuclear device into the United States, don't bring it on a missile.

[JuBru]

salty, you are arguing with absolutely the wrong person on this board about this. so it might be best to drop it... like, forever. unless you're arguing placement, then that's fair game. but the system it's self, no-go.

[saltydawg]

The initial problem is that there are technologies of which you are not aware.

But, if we're going to limit our conversation to missile to missile intercept, there are numerous tests which have shown we're pretty good at it. Missile to missile intercept might not like saturation, but the countries that have that capability also know we have the same capability.

If you want to get a nuclear device into the United States, don't bring it on a missile.

Mr. Gorilla, "tests" of missile to missile intercepts are pretty good at it? How fast is the target going? How many targets are there? Is there advance notice of the test? Is the target transmitting a radio signal? Did the targat take any defensive measures?

It seems to me that any truly effective MDS would merely force the attacker to another delivery system.

[Abominable Gorilla]

Mr. Gorilla, "tests" of missile to missile intercepts are pretty good at it? How fast is the target going? How many targets are there? Is there advance notice of the test? Is the target transmitting a radio signal? Did the targat take any defensive measures?

It seems to me that any truly effective MDS would merely force the attacker to another delivery system.

You said "the MDS is a joke" and that all that was public information. Aren't you a reader of the monthly MDS Journal? It seems like you should have the answers to those questions before you're so ready to call it a joke. Look, honestly, I respect you. But clearly this is not a topic where you're going to find details on the most up to date information and certainly you understand why.

Secondly, most of the answers depend on the stage for which the interceptor is designed. The United States of America does not rely on one (or three) line(s) of defense against long range missile attack. The targets are designed to imulate the launch vehicles. Naturally, there is advance notice of the test, but part of the test is going from storage to go.

Isn't that last statement like saying, "building a better mouse trap is futile because they'll just build a better mouse?" Besides, WMDs are not the only reason to have a good MDS. It's also nice to have the ability to protect our soldiers from shorter range launches.

[Abominable Gorilla]

This video isn't particularly exciting, I guess. However, THAAD (terminal high altitude area defense) is one of the interceptors employeed. In the last few years, Japan requested to purchase more than a few of these given the events happening in North Korea. The problem with THAAD is that it is a terminal stage intercept, which means the missile is already coming down. In the case of a WMD, it would still be bad albeit not as bad as an impact. You'll notice that this is the 29th of 30 successful intercept tests in the past four years.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvUPq5V07O4

[saltydawg]

I know that a lot of good people are working hard on making MDS a reality but in the real world I would not bet a lot of money on the system working. Why? Because although we might have new technology so does the other guy. In fact, nobody knows what would happen by ONE thermonuclear explosion 100 miles high above our most advanced radar system. The point being that time degrades any technology. We build MDS. We don't know if any critical component in it will work as expected in ten years. And the whole system has to work the first and only time it is used. The USA has a good number of thermonuclear devices. We don't know if they will work after 20 years of storage but since we have so many we can expect a good number to operate as designed. MDS is a 1000 times more complex than a thermonuclear weapon.