Missile defense system - Good or bad?

[sin miedo]

I think it's a horrible idea. It will be like the French when they built the Maginot line before WWII. Sure, the U.S. might (since almost all tests have failed miserably) be able to knock down a few missiles launched at us, but if someone wants to attack us, they will find a way (i.e, suitcase bombs, fertilizer bombs, etc.). And what good would a missile defense shield have done on 9/11/01?

I'll write more later, but I'm tired right now.

[Tkinter1]

Yeah the Magiont wall worked out real well didn't it? Lol

[sin miedo]

Exactly.

[Capitalist Imperial]

The Magiont wall and an MDS are 2 totally different things and I am insulted merely at the comaprison.

1st of all, with the Maginot Wall, we're talking abouth the French here. I mean, C'mon.

With missle defense, although the preliminary tests were not perfect, they are not expected to be. We are in the development stage, there are supposed to be errors and adjustments. The last test was a success, and overall success levels have consistently trended up. And for a system designed to detect, triangulate, and shoot down multiple-mach ICBM's in orbit all within minutes, I think we've done pretty good considering we've only been at it for about 3 years.

I am confident that the Missle Defense Shield not only will work superbly, but that it is a monumentous idea. I am excited that it will soon take its place in the guardianship of the soverign and benevolent United States of America.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Quote: from Capitalist Imperial on 1:59 am on Jan. 3, 2003

1st of all, with the Maginot Wall, we're talking abouth the French here. I mean, C'mon.



Is this ment to be racist? You manage quite well in it.

[bluerev002]

hmm, interesting. i would like to learn more about how thsi wall is going. do any of you have any links?

[HankMorgan]

The day the first ballistic missle flew, way back in the 1940's, work should have started on a defense. Work should continue until success is achieved. There is no reason to just live with the threat.

Clearly the US doesn't have a working missile defense now but by all means work should continue. Just because something doesn't work now doesn't mean it should be given up on.

Just like a polio vaccination does nothing to prevent whooping cough, a missile defense system won't stop a suitcase bomb. Polio vaccinations and missile defenses don't stop everything but they're both good ideas.

Come on, people, this isn't a hard problem.


(Edited by HankMorgan at 2:23 am on Jan. 3, 2003)

[Anonymous]

Quote: from CCCP on 7:23 am on Jan. 3, 2003

Quote: from Capitalist Imperial on 1:59 am on Jan. 3, 2003

1st of all, with the Maginot Wall, we're talking abouth the French here. I mean, C'mon.



Is this ment to be racist? You manage quite well in it.


The French are an ethnic group, not a race. And it's okay to make fun of the French becuase...uh...well........they're French! :biggrin:

[sin miedo]

But how much money are we spending on a system that, even if it works, will still leave gaping holes in terms of defense? Sure it'll nock down missiles, but from whom? The same States that we'll piss off if we build the goddamn thing. Then they'll just put funds into finding other vulnerabilities.

The money should instead go toward positive foreign relations. We spend (the U.S.) around 1% of our GDP on foreign relations. In this increasingly inter-connected world this is not enough for the hegemon in the world to spend, and expect positive attitudes in other States. How is it Saudi Arabia is able to spare the cash to set up Madrassas (teaching the Wahabi form of Islam, one of the most "fundamentalist" forms, but this is a whole other topic) in developing nations around the world, and we can't spend more to set up schools and provide more food around the world?

[Stormin Norman]

This topic has been discussed in further detail at this link:

http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/top...ic=1343&start=0 (http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/topic.pl?forum=22&topic=1343&start=0)

I have to disagree with some of my friends here. Work on a BMD system has been ongoing since the late sixties or early seventies. What we are seeing now is a massive disinformation campaign designed to confuse our potential enemies as to the extent of our capabilities. The only way we will ever purposely devulge its true capability to an enemy is in the event that it must be used. 300 billion annually didn't just disappear. I don't see signs of a large military infrastructure on the ground, so I assume that our the focus was shifted to space based programs. Another good clue was given by a Soviet defector who testified before congress about the Soviet suit-case nuclear program. One can only assume this measure was taken after certain information was leaked to them via espionage. There is a large world out there, of great consequence, that exists without the knowledge of the common man. Perhaps this is for the best. If people were kept abreast of certain developments, they probably would not leave their houses.

(Edited by Stormin Norman at 11:12 pm on Jan. 3, 2003)

[Capitalist Imperial]

Good point, SN!

Is the MDS merely a "decoy" to shift attention away from the true defense array?

[Stormin Norman]

Call it a hunch.

[Tkinter1]

This missile defense system isn't just going to protect against the saturn 5 sized ICBM's you see in the 60's movies. Missiles with nuclear warheads could be fired from fishing boats. I think it's main purpose is to deter rather than to deflect, becuase we have other lesser known defense measures such as the missile subs that patrol our waters.

[Moskitto]

it's the brits and germans who aren't meant to like the french, you americans have to love them :D

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from Moskitto on 8:38 pm on Jan. 3, 2003
it's the brits and germans who aren't meant to like the french, you americans have to love them :D

Heck no, Moskitto, we love making fun of the French every bit as much as the germans and you Brits!!!

[Umoja]

The French are part of the reason we are a country.

I have to disagree with many of the Socialist though. Their is no point in not creating a Missle Defense system because it could lead to advances in other technologies, just as long as the defense system isn't dangerous to people or the enviornment, then I could care less. Proliferation will lead to other countries constructing their own anyway.

[Stormin Norman]

This article is relevant to this discussion.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/libra...3-cia-usia1.htm (http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/library/news/2000/02/000203-cia-usia1.htm)

[sin miedo]

Hmmmm. While it is true that the gov't is definately keeping things secret in terms of defense, I think it'd be extremely hard for them to hide a system that cost 300 billion dollars and somehow engulfs the entire country. The idea of newer, missile defense submarines patrolling the coasts is probably true to an extent. In order to be truly effective there'd have to be a whole lot of them, and while the ocean is stupendously gigantic, in this day and age and at the numbers necessary, they couldn't stay hidden forever.

And the same goes for space based defenses. While I'm not necessarily discounting these theories, I think they depend highly on the idea that the U.S. and its allies military institutions are able to keep huge leaps in technology secret for large stretches of time. Back in the '50s '60s and 70's this was the case. But the world is getting smaller every day, and I think it would be folly to overestimate the ability of gov'ts to keep things under wraps not only from their citizens(which isn't that hard), but also the much more difficult task of keeping secrets from other States and NGO's.