Missle Shield Program

[shadowdude]

Source

RIDLEY PARK, Pa. - President Bush promoted his administration's plans to build an anti-missile system Tuesday, suggesting that the program's opponents are jeopardizing the country's safety.

"I think those who oppose this ballistic missile system don't understand the threats of the 21st century," the president told applauding workers at defense contractor Boeing in Pennsylvania, a crucial state in Bush's bid for re-election.

"We say to those tyrants who believe they can blackmail America and the free world: 'You fire, we're going to shoot it down,'" Bush said.

The president said that Boeing engineers have loaded the first ballistic missile interceptor into a silo in Alaska, characterizing it as "the beginning of a missile defense system that was envisioned by Ronald Reagan."

Bush said opponents of the system are "living in the past. We're living in the future. We're going to do what's necessary to protect this country.

Why would people oppose a missle defense system?

 

[zjl56]

People oppose it because they think it costs to much though it costs alot I think it is worth it.

 

[h4ppy]

They oppose it because Bush is doing it.

 

[BassDude726]

Personally, I think it's a fairly useless idea now, but the stakes are too high not to put a system in place like that one. Russia doesn't pose any sort of significant threat to the US now, and China is the only other country with ICBMs for the US to worry about (unless you want to count France hehe), and the US and China need each other too much as far as trade goes to do anything stupid like nuke each other. As Tom Clancy put it, it's not the guy with 20,000 nukes I'm worried about, it's the guy with one. Iran is developing nukes, but they don't have the capability to launch them at us on ICBMs. I think we should concentrate more on domestic security measures, but a missile umbrella couldn't hurt on the off chance things go bad with Russia or China.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

I'm all for trying to intercept missiles that are going to vaporize my city. Even if it doesn't work 100% it is worth it. Nuclear weapons are probably the most important weapon my governemtnt can protect me from. You gotta start somewhere. I could care less what foreign powers think or how they want to react to it.

 

[Hakim]

I guess people fear a strong defence might invite to aggressiveness. Some are most likely jealous.

I think US should go for it, other powers wouldn't (and will not) waste a second if they got the chance to build their own.

 

[betazed]

Why would people oppose a missle defense system?

For the same reason I do not need a untested anti-aircraft gun to defend my apartment

• an anti-aircraft gun will not defend my apartment because the people likely to attack it cannot be attacked with an anti-aircraft gun.
• the gun is untested so even if i do fire it it may not work
• the gun is very very costly. I will be far better off buying a small pistol to defend my apartment
• if I get an anti-aircraft gun there is a possibility that my would be opponent (currently all he has is sticks and stones) will get a bazooka to attack me. Then not only will be anti-aircraft be useless against a bazooka I also end up with a deadlier opponent

The first few responses in this thread are typical too. To most people it is like a switch that you can throw that will make all enemy missiles targetted at US vanish into thin air. I wish it were so. I ask them to first read up on missile defense and understand how it works. Then try to understand what it takes to make it work. Then try to understand if there are other ways to reach the same objective. Then try to understand if those other ways are cheaper.

Then back the missile defense shield if you still are in the mind to do it.

 

[BassDude726]

The missile defense system that is currently being developed is less reliant on the space-based satellites that knock out missiles and concentrates more on giant lasers mounted on 747s - no joke. The reason this defense system is fairly useless is that it requires a "chrome-dome" type deployment of these airplanes. Chrome Dome was the operation during the Cold War that kept B-52s armed with nukes in the air near Russia at all times. The 747s with lasers need to be within line of sight of a launching nuke to be able to shoot it down, which means that they'd already have to be there when the missile was launching. Great system, no?

 

[h4ppy]

if I get an anti-aircraft gun there is a possibility that my would be opponent (currently all he has is sticks and stones) will get a bazooka to attack me. Then not only will be anti-aircraft be useless against a bazooka I also end up with a deadlier opponent

So if regular weapons are ICBMs then what are bazookas?

 

[Hakim]

Which would the other alternatives be then?

 

[~Corsair#01~]

Well, the problem with missile defenses such as these is that, though they could shoot down 2/3 nukes- if fighting a major nuclear war, and if 3000 nukes are launched, 1000 will still get through.

 

[betazed]

So if regular weapons are ICBMs then what are bazookas?

huh?

 

[h4ppy]

Well, the problem with missile defenses such as these is that, though they could shoot down 2/3 nukes- if fighting a major nuclear war, and if 3000 nukes are launched, 1000 will still get through.

But 2000 wouldn't.

huh?

I was saying that you were saying that missile shield would cause more advanced weapons to be made. So what is more advanced and deadly than ICBMs.

 

[betazed]

Which would the other alternatives be then?

The other alternatives depend on your objective. State your objective and I will state the other alternatives.

Remember complete cast-iron nuclear immunity cannot be an objective. It is impossible (with or without missile defense).

 

[BassDude726]

I think this is more proof that either Bush knows a heck of a lot more than he lets on about national security threats, or that he's a complete idiot. He says that the missile defense system would be to protect the US, but no one with the capability to hit us with an ICBM would be dumb enough to try (Mutually Assured Destruction, anyone?). It's more like, "Iran will soon have the capability to nuke Israel, so we're going to spend billions upon billions of your tax dollars to protect our boy in the Middle East."

 

[shadowdude]

huh?

In your scenario what are the bazookas in real life?

 

[shadowdude]

I think this is more proof that either Bush knows a heck of a lot more than he lets on about national security threats, or that he's a complete idiot. He says that the missile defense system would be to protect the US, but no one with the capability to hit us with an ICBM would be dumb enough to try (Mutually Assured Destruction, anyone?). It's more like, "Iran will soon have the capability to nuke Israel, so we're going to spend billions upon billions of your tax dollars to protect our boy in the Middle East."

I remember hearing that NK had missles capable of reaching Alaska-thats a pretty scary thought with Kim jung in control!

 

[Hakim]

@betazed: the objective would be to stop as many nukes as possible.

 

[BassDude726]

He said that he did, but his missile tests proved otherwise. They were just a chance to shoot some missiles over Japan. He wouldn't be dumb enough to nuke America, he knows that his country would get turned into a parking lot if he did. He'd be far more likely to flatten a few Japanese cities.

 

[betazed]

In your scenario what are the bazookas in real life?

Bazookas could be plenty of things.

• Long range nuclear-tipped cruise missiles that a ballistic missile defense cannot see.
• suitcase nukes that can be taken apart and build from parts shipped separately to US.
• Chem bio weapons (in smart bombs) dropped from stealth planes.
• a man carrying a dormat virus which activates itself after the man comes into US and then spreads from his corpse.

Need me to go on?