Page 6 of 12 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 117

Thread: US downs missile with new interceptor

  1. #51
    Sage
    EagleAye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Last Seen
    03-28-13 @ 09:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,697

    Re: US downs missile with new interceptor

    It's very easy for us Americans to sit before our computers (that most people in the world could never afford), and presume "our" definition of "sane" applies perfectly to everyone else in the world. The fact is, it doesn't. the MAD concept works between us and Russia and China, because all these players understand MAD and want to avoid it. The concept accepts that if my cities are destroyed, yours are too. Since this is unacceptable to both sides, no launch occurs.

    But if you're dealing with a fanatic(s) who "accepts" the destruction of his own cities/people as the "Will of God" or whatever his fanaticism dictates, the MAD concept falls flat on it's face. It ceases to work.

    It wouldn't even require a fanatic necessarily, just mistaken belief. I remember when 9/11 occurred. Many of the people around me and even those in the news were speculating that the United States was teetering on the verge of collapse, as a result of panic. This was a ridiculous idea. The collapse of two buildings (albeit important ones) could not possibly trigger the collapse of the whole country. But plenty of American-born and bred Americans sincerely, honestly, believed America would fall into barbarism over the event. If Americans, who should know better, believed this, what of some fanatical Khomeini or Asian dilettante? They already perceive us as fat and morally weak. Perhaps they might also believe that the loss of one entire city could cause complete disarray, spasms of panic, followed by immediate collapse with no retribution at all. They might actually believe they could get away with it. We on these boards, know this is stupid, but who is to say that someone who sees us as moral defectives will have the same understanding?

    ABMs such as the SM-3, are there to guard against failures of MAD for whatever reason. The US and Russia understand each other well enough, so such systems are not designed with Russia in mind. They're designed for those who cannot understand, or refuse to understand, or are simply ignorant of why MAD has protected us all for so long.
    Check out my Blog http://momusnews.wordpress.com/
    Sherry's Photography site: http://www.sheywicklundphotos.com/

  2. #52
    Guru
    Republic Now!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Seen
    09-12-14 @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    2,671

    Re: US downs missile with new interceptor

    Missile defense systems aren't just about military advantage, but more importantly minimizing causality in the event of a missile attack. While we could easily wipe out any country that attempts an assault on us, avoiding large scale damage from that attack is something that we would have great difficulty doing in our present capacity.

    What surprises me is how anyone can be against, or at very least think insignificance of, a development of technology that mitigates the power and destructive force of ICBMs.
    One who makes himself a worm cannot complain when tread upon.

  3. #53
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The Republic of Texas.
    Last Seen
    11-15-17 @ 11:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,647

    Re: US downs missile with new interceptor

    Quote Originally Posted by EagleAye View Post
    It's very easy for us Americans to sit before our computers (that most people in the world could never afford), and presume "our" definition of "sane" applies perfectly to everyone else in the world. The fact is, it doesn't. the MAD concept works between us and Russia and China, because all these players understand MAD and want to avoid it. The concept accepts that if my cities are destroyed, yours are too. Since this is unacceptable to both sides, no launch occurs.

    But if you're dealing with a fanatic(s) who "accepts" the destruction of his own cities/people as the "Will of God" or whatever his fanaticism dictates, the MAD concept falls flat on it's face. It ceases to work.

    It wouldn't even require a fanatic necessarily, just mistaken belief. I remember when 9/11 occurred. Many of the people around me and even those in the news were speculating that the United States was teetering on the verge of collapse, as a result of panic. This was a ridiculous idea. The collapse of two buildings (albeit important ones) could not possibly trigger the collapse of the whole country. But plenty of American-born and bred Americans sincerely, honestly, believed America would fall into barbarism over the event. If Americans, who should know better, believed this, what of some fanatical Khomeini or Asian dilettante? They already perceive us as fat and morally weak. Perhaps they might also believe that the loss of one entire city could cause complete disarray, spasms of panic, followed by immediate collapse with no retribution at all. They might actually believe they could get away with it. We on these boards, know this is stupid, but who is to say that someone who sees us as moral defectives will have the same understanding?

    ABMs such as the SM-3, are there to guard against failures of MAD for whatever reason. The US and Russia understand each other well enough, so such systems are not designed with Russia in mind. They're designed for those who cannot understand, or refuse to understand, or are simply ignorant of why MAD has protected us all for so long.
    The MAD concept can be summed up effectively in the song Russians by Sting.

    "We share the same biology,
    regardless of ideology,
    Believe me when I say to you,
    I hope the Russians love their children too."

    Change Russians to whomever it may applie to.

    Unfortunately, when dealing with some extremist, their "love" of their children includes sacrificing them to/for their god.

  4. #54
    Guru
    Porchev's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    GA
    Last Seen
    01-08-17 @ 12:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    3,092

    Re: US downs missile with new interceptor

    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    The MAD concept can be summed up effectively in the song Russians by Sting.

    "We share the same biology,
    regardless of ideology,
    Believe me when I say to you,
    I hope the Russians love their children too."

    Change Russians to whomever it may applie to.

    Unfortunately, when dealing with some extremist, their "love" of their children includes sacrificing them to/for their god.
    I forgot about that song:

  5. #55
    Death2Globalists Matt Foley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    ExecuteTheTraitors
    Last Seen
    11-24-12 @ 12:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,574

    Re: US downs missile with new interceptor

    Quote Originally Posted by Republic Now! View Post
    Missile defense systems aren't just about military advantage, but more importantly minimizing causality in the event of a missile attack. While we could easily wipe out any country that attempts an assault on us, avoiding large scale damage from that attack is something that we would have great difficulty doing in our present capacity.

    What surprises me is how anyone can be against, or at very least think insignificance of, a development of technology that mitigates the power and destructive force of ICBMs.
    Which countries have ICBM's and nukes?

  6. #56
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The Republic of Texas.
    Last Seen
    11-15-17 @ 11:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,647

    Re: US downs missile with new interceptor

    Quote Originally Posted by Porchev View Post
    I forgot about that song:
    So much of it is still so revelent today. Only the names have been changed.

  7. #57
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: US downs missile with new interceptor

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    Yeah like people who don't do anything all day.

    Sent from my blasted phone.

    Yea you know education, health care, food programs, infanstructure.. You know the **** that helps people instead of killing people.. You can roll your eyes all ya want..


  8. #58
    Discount Philosopher
    specklebang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Last Seen
    06-05-14 @ 08:26 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    11,524

    Re: US downs missile with new interceptor

    Here is why I don't agree.

    1) It has taken 20 years and an unconscionable amount of investment to have one success (after many failures) in a controlled environment.
    2) It will take another fortune to develop one that is fairly reliable.
    3) Other than our noble owners and their underground bunkers, who else will be protected? New York? San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago, Milwaukee, Kansas City, Tulsa or any other population centers?
    4) Who is likely to attack us? The smaller rogue states are much more likely to use another form of delivery than an ICBM. The medium rogues (Pakistan) have many more ICBMs, so how many will we build? Hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands?
    5) Will we also need these for our allies? Which ones?
    6) Since Russia has already declared they will enter the race, will we trigger another arms race?
    7) No, I think this is an implausible concept. We will do ourselves more harm by investing in Sci-Fi than in education.

    Of course, it's all just IMHO. Maybe it's a great idea. Does anybody think this is worthwhile? Another 20 years and trillions of dollars?

  9. #59
    Guru
    Republic Now!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Seen
    09-12-14 @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    2,671

    Re: US downs missile with new interceptor

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Foley View Post
    Which countries have ICBM's and nukes?
    How is that relevant to my point? I don't have an inventory of every countries weapons, but regardless of whether it is currently a threat, it is a long term concern and security from such threats is important even if the threat isn't immediate.
    One who makes himself a worm cannot complain when tread upon.

  10. #60
    Guru
    Republic Now!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Seen
    09-12-14 @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    2,671

    Re: US downs missile with new interceptor

    Quote Originally Posted by specklebang View Post
    Here is why I don't agree.

    1) It has taken 20 years and an unconscionable amount of investment to have one success (after many failures) in a controlled environment.
    2) It will take another fortune to develop one that is fairly reliable.
    3) Other than our noble owners and their underground bunkers, who else will be protected? New York? San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago, Milwaukee, Kansas City, Tulsa or any other population centers?
    4) Who is likely to attack us? The smaller rogue states are much more likely to use another form of delivery than an ICBM. The medium rogues (Pakistan) have many more ICBMs, so how many will we build? Hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands?
    5) Will we also need these for our allies? Which ones?
    6) Since Russia has already declared they will enter the race, will we trigger another arms race?
    7) No, I think this is an implausible concept. We will do ourselves more harm by investing in Sci-Fi than in education.

    Of course, it's all just IMHO. Maybe it's a great idea. Does anybody think this is worthwhile? Another 20 years and trillions of dollars?
    How would you invest money into education to improve its quality?
    One who makes himself a worm cannot complain when tread upon.

Page 6 of 12 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •