[bootlegga]

LoneCanadian LoneCanadian:

What's wrong with Missile Defense? lots of good jobs servicing and building all the sites the Yanks install at their cost? If the WW3 hits all the missiles gonna fly over us anyway--might as well stop them as soon as possible. So what if it's not 100% accurate or effective.... you would rather have entire attack of missiles hit us (Canada and U.S.) instead of say even 50%? Please explain how I am wrong...

As I noted on page 5, there are several.

It isn't cheap and the political will to spend potentially TRILLIONS of dollars on it aren't there. Even with supercomputers, scaling up a system to stop a mass launch is going to cost far more than the countermeasures would. Such an arms race could bankrupt the USA, which doesn't really have its financial picture very stable right now.

Another problem is that it may start an arms race with other countries (specifically China and Russia). Depending on the system's effectiveness, they could build dozens, hundreds or even thousands of additional boosters to negate its effects. Then the US us caught in the ultimate catch-22 where they need to build more anti-missiles, which cause opponents to build more ICBMS...and so on and so on.

Additionally, there are questions over how capable it is. While I agree that technology has certainly improved from the 1980s, I don't think it's anywhere near the 100% mark. Just look at the Patriot as a case study. Everyone was told how great it was, but the reality was that even though it hit almost every Scud targeted, many Scuds still landed and did enormous damage. Nukes are area effect weapons and unless the system is 100% effective, there is still the possibility that a nation could fire a dozen missiles and take out a city or two. So while it's great that your strategic force largely survives, the effects on those cities (and their inhabitants) is just as serious.

Having said all that, I'm not opposed to the US funding it themselves. Just don't expect a cheque for $50 billion from Canada (like they are for the F-35) for it.

[Gunnair]

bootlegga bootlegga:

Thanos Thanos:

It'll probably turn into the biggest bit of cynical face saving of all time, at least since the fall of Saddam, as it appears that someone inside NK is deliberately trying to collapse the regime without it appearing that way to the population. The NK generals goad L'il Kim into doing something stupid. He does it and pushes the US and SK to the brink of war. Then the Chinese step in, wipe out the NK Communist party but conveniently leave the NK general staff alive. The Kim family regime and it's ridiculous cult of personality comes to a bloody end, the generals take over with the backing of China, and a state of affairs with a massively liberalized (but still Communist) NK a la modern VietNam comes into existence. The Americans back off and NK - SK integration accelerates at a rapid pace with family reunifications, a mostly open border, and the capitalistic exploiting by both SK and China of an impovrished NK population that is desperate for jobs, even if they're the shittiest and lowest paying ones on the planet. A lot of people end up dying but at least the mess doesn't spread outside of NK.

Could happen. Kim doesn't have top-to-bottom control of the entire country, military, and Communist party as much as we believe he does. I've read elsewhere that Kim and his generals have major disagreements on a lot of things. And the generals might be tired of having to deal with an insane family when it would be easier for them to wipe out the party altogether and take over the whole show themselves.

That's a real possibility, except for the increased integration - the last thing China wants is another high tech Western rival on its borders (Japan and Taiwan are plenty, thank you very much).

The possibility of a unified, re-invigorated Korea is not a pleasant thought for China - unless of course it was run by North Korea and allied with China and not the USA.

A flattened NK might be a financial boon for all of the reconstruction needs that could be supplied by the Chinese.

[BartSimpson]

bootlegga bootlegga:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

raydan raydan:

I'm guessing that you guys will be able to intercept and bring down a North Korean plane carrying a nuclear warhead before it gets to LA.

Obama's cut our readiness to where the USA often has no fighters in the air patrolling the CONUS and nothing on ready alert, either.

That said, the Norks stand a better chance of getting a cargo plane into the USA than they do an ICBM. Pathetic.

According to Fox News, there are still 18 sites across the USA that have ready alert fighters (though two MAY close at some time in the future);

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03 ... n-va-minn/

Oh, yeah we have such fighters it's just that their engines are cold. We're actually at a lower state of readiness than we were on 9/11 when the entire USA was 'protected' by two alert fighters attached to the Massachussetts Air National Guard out of Otis on Cape Cod. And neither of them was armed until the war warning went out.

Obama's got us right back to where the fighters are unarmed when they go aloft (save for out of Elmendorf).

[BartSimpson]

Well, given that Valdemort Putin is threatening to use nuclear missiles to back up his aggression I thought it would be proper to revisit this topic as opposed to opening up a new one.

Putin says Russia is going to withdraw from the treaty that bans intermediate range missiles (that Russia will use to threaten Europe). So does Europe need a missile defense? If not, then how will Europe deter Russia's new threat?

And Putin is threatening nuclear war if NATO doesn't go along with his invasion of Ukraine. What happens when Putin predictably pulls this sh*t with Estonia? Will we let Estonia go or will we fight?

http://thediplomat.com/2014/04/will-nar ... xt-crimea/

Edit: And now that we have a criminal regime with nukes in Russia isn't it prudent to have a missile defense? Or do we just let this c*cksucker blackmail us while he deploys an in-depth missile defense?

[BRAH]

Holy Shit the thread is 10 years old that's longer than my last relationship.

[RaymondCA]

Robair Robair:

Godz46 Godz46:

It will work someday, and its mainly for defense purpuses to intercept incoming missiles mid way in the pacific ocean.[/size]

My personal stance is; get it working first, then you can make a sales pitch to Canada.

And by working I don't mean in a controlled enviornment when everything is 'perfect'.

If you read the article, the first tests were postponed because of weather concerns. So... we're only gonna have defense on sunny days?

Sounds to me like they have a lot of work to do.

Exactly, the missiles made in China only work in sunny day. Their engines are not waterproof!

[BartSimpson]

RaymondCA RaymondCA:

Exactly, the missiles made in China only work in sunny day. Their engines are not waterproof!

You do missile tests in clear weather so ground observers can see and verify the results of the test. Otherwise you have to trust radar tracks that, in the past, contractors have faked.