What's the deal with the US missile defense?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by JSSPMK, Jul 16, 2008.

What do you think?

  1. I feel the same way

    4 vote(s)
  2. I disagree

    4 vote(s)
  3. Don't care

    1 vote(s)


    US is spending billions on stregthening a so called defense system. Do any of you, specifically non-US citizens feel that maybe this is not what it seems? A spider doesn't build a web to protect other insects, it builds a web only for its own benefit, its own survival. My gut feeling is not liking this at all I must say.
  2. My gut tells me that this "missile defense" system was not intended to be used solely for missile defense, but rather for tracking citizens and/or weather control.

    How is a missile defense system supposed to protect people from a terrorist attack?

    Why is it that nobody questions any of this?


    Well because US probably pays other countries to have radar/missile bases in their countries. People's thinking is manipulated via media, so majority do believe that it is for their own good. If US wasn't entangled in so much debt, then maybe I wouldn't be that bothered, but I can't help but think that this is all done for the benefit of USA, spread the web across the world to protect or to take over?
  4. Pine gap, baby.
    Paid allies, not that anyone should be unaware of these things, after ww2-except americans, they kinda bought the cold war ethos.

    The avro arrow, the perennial thorn in the side of logical us government behaviour, regarding its "allies".

    I think the phillipines, is the best example of US government interference, given its actions there before ww1, as a truly expansionist empire, and its subsequent actions through ww2 and beyond.

    If i had a stack of missiles, i guess, i would want to defend them. With, more missiles? Makes a little sense, not much though. It does reek of fraud.
  5. The Boeing YAL-1 Airborne Laser (ABL) weapons system is a megawatt-class chemical oxygen iodine laser (COIL) mounted inside a modified Boeing 747-400F. It is primarily designed to destroy tactical ballistic missiles...

    In theory, the ABL could be used against hostile fighter aircraft, cruise missiles, or even low-earth-orbit satellites...

  6. "What's the deal with the US missile defense?"

    Maybe america is itching for some war with russia

    no and I'm not trying to be funny
  7. Glad someone mentioned laser technology.

    Didn't the chinese already test something like that? And who cares anyway, the average person has no say in these things.

    Missile defense, great, show me any evidence whatsoever, that missile to missile defense technologies have ever worked at all, better than , say, 20%.

    There is no such evidence, they suck basically. Billions down the drain, to prove taxpayers dollars cant reliably , ever, actually do shit against an icbm attack.

    Wonderful. Who knows what these bastards have acheived with laser's, no doubt, in 30 years time, our grandkids will be reading about it, the covert shit these pond slime are putting us through now.
  8. News article:

    The Pentagon is building a network of sea and land-based missiles in the United States, Europe and Japan in response to longer-range missiles being developed by nations such as Iran and North Korea. Iran, which tested missiles last week, is believed to have some with a range of 1,250 miles (2,012 kilometers), which could reach large sections of Europe. Obering said Iran may also have an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of striking the United States by 2015.



    Dry article at wikipedia:

  9. -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I would think anti-missile technology would work fine if
    one eliminated the "we have to hit a bullet with a bullet"
    phrase I've so often heard. Just fire anti-missiles with
    nuclear tips. You don't have to get close at all.

    Anyway the laser approach is neater, so to speak.

    The Chinese can shoot down our satellites. This is obvious
    since they can shoot down their own.
    On 17 January 2007 Craig Covault, writing in Aviation Week & Space Technology, reported that China conducted a successful anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons test at about 5:28 p.m. EST on 11 January 2007. A kinetic kill vehicle launched by a medium range ballistic missile destroyed an inactive Chinese weather satellite.

    In August 2006 there were reports that China had fired high-power lasers at American intelligence satellites flying over its territory. National Reconnaissance Office Director, Donald M. Kerr, told reporters that a US satellite had recently been "painted," or illuminated, by a ground-based laser in China. Some observers saw this as tests of Chinese capability to blind the spacecraft, while others took it as being tests of a laser radar for guiding a direct ascent kinetic energy ASAT. It was unclear how many times a the ground-based laser was tested against US spacecraft.