A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

U.S. Ballistic Missile Shield Incapable to Defend Against a Real Attack



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 14th 04, 01:56 PM
Larry Dighera
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default U.S. Ballistic Missile Shield Incapable to Defend Against a Real Attack


The multibillion-dollar U.S. ballistic missile shield due to
start operating by Sept. 30 appears incapable of shooting down
any incoming warheads, an independent scientists' group said. A
technical analysis found "no basis for believing the system will
have any capability to defend against a real attack," the Union
of Concerned Scientists said in a 76-page report titled
"Technical Realities." The Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency
rejected the report. "It will provide a defense against
incoming missiles for the first time in this country's
history," said Richard Lehner, an agency spokesman. BOEING CO.
is assembling the shield, which would use the interceptors to
launch "kill vehicles" meant to pulverize targets in the
midcourse of their flight paths, outside the Earth's
atmosphere. Using infrared sensors, the vehicles would search
the chill of space for the warheads. So far, the interceptors
have scored hits five times in eight highly controlled tests.
(Reuters 10:00 AM ET 05/13/2004)

Mo
http://q1.schwab.com/s/r?l=248&a=960...a&s=rb0405 13

================================================== ==============

--

Irrational beliefs ultimately lead to irrational acts.
-- Larry Dighera,
  #2  
Old May 14th 04, 05:40 PM
Scott Ferrin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 14 May 2004 12:56:36 GMT, Larry Dighera
wrote:


The multibillion-dollar U.S. ballistic missile shield due to
start operating by Sept. 30 appears incapable of shooting down
any incoming warheads, an independent scientists' group said.



Which only goes to show you the quality of "scientists" writing the
report.
  #3  
Old May 14th 04, 06:07 PM
Thomas J. Paladino Jr.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 14 May 2004 12:56:36 GMT, Larry Dighera
wrote:


The multibillion-dollar U.S. ballistic missile shield due to
start operating by Sept. 30 appears incapable of shooting down
any incoming warheads, an independent scientists' group said.



Which only goes to show you the quality of "scientists" writing the
report.


The so-called "Union of Concerned Scientists " has been politically opposed
to the missile shield since day one. It's no surprise that they would come
out with a report like this.

I wonder, if they're so 'concerned', did they also provide any technical
solutions to the problems they supposedly found, or did they take the
typical defeatist "It's impossible and will never work so just give up and
never try again" attitude that most opponents of the missile shield take?



  #4  
Old May 14th 04, 07:01 PM
Larry Dighera
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 14 May 2004 17:07:23 GMT, "Thomas J. Paladino Jr."
wrote in Message-Id:
:


"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 14 May 2004 12:56:36 GMT, Larry Dighera
wrote:


The multibillion-dollar U.S. ballistic missile shield due to
start operating by Sept. 30 appears incapable of shooting down
any incoming warheads, an independent scientists' group said.



Which only goes to show you the quality of "scientists" writing the
report.


The so-called "Union of Concerned Scientists " has been politically opposed
to the missile shield since day one. It's no surprise that they would come
out with a report like this.


Here's the web page:
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_securit...fm?pageID=1403

I wonder, if they're so 'concerned', did they also provide any technical
solutions to the problems they supposedly found, or did they take the
typical defeatist "It's impossible and will never work so just give up and
never try again" attitude that most opponents of the missile shield take?


You can examine the full report he
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_securit...ageID=1403#Top
--

Irrational beliefs ultimately lead to irrational acts.
-- Larry Dighera,
  #5  
Old May 14th 04, 08:42 PM
Chad Irby
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Larry Dighera wrote:

On Fri, 14 May 2004 17:07:23 GMT, "Thomas J. Paladino Jr."
wrote in Message-Id:
:


"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
.. .

The so-called "Union of Concerned Scientists " has been politically opposed
to the missile shield since day one. It's no surprise that they would come
out with a report like this.


Here's the web page:
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_securit...fm?pageID=1403

I wonder, if they're so 'concerned', did they also provide any technical
solutions to the problems they supposedly found, or did they take the
typical defeatist "It's impossible and will never work so just give up and
never try again" attitude that most opponents of the missile shield take?


You can examine the full report he
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_securit...ageID=1403#Top


The *really* funny part is that they keep unfavorably comparing the new
missile defense system to the one the Clinton administration was working
on (that the UCS also didn't like when it was on the boards, but which
is apparently now the "gold standard").

There's a lot of handwaving in the UCS report, most of which is "we're
not sure they can ever fix the US BMD system, but we are sure that
places like North Korea will easily handle the similar technical
problems inherent in making useful decoys without significant research
efforts, and it won't impact their missile payloads, even though nobody
else has demonstrated such countermeasures without a lot of missile
flights."

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.
  #6  
Old May 14th 04, 09:48 PM
Cub Driver
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


The multibillion-dollar U.S. ballistic missile shield due to
start operating by Sept. 30 appears incapable of shooting down
any incoming warheads, an independent scientists' group said.



Which only goes to show you the quality of "scientists" writing the
report.


The Union of Concerned Scientists, perhaps?

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum
www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! blog www.vivabush.org
  #7  
Old May 14th 04, 10:50 PM
Chad Irby
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Cub Driver wrote:

Which only goes to show you the quality of "scientists" writing the
report.


The Union of Concerned Scientists, perhaps?


Yup. The same folks who have been telling us to listen to them for most
of the Cold War, and who have been wrong for almost the whole time.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.
  #8  
Old May 14th 04, 11:02 PM
Scott Ferrin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 14 May 2004 16:48:46 -0400, Cub Driver
wrote:


The multibillion-dollar U.S. ballistic missile shield due to
start operating by Sept. 30 appears incapable of shooting down
any incoming warheads, an independent scientists' group said.



Which only goes to show you the quality of "scientists" writing the
report.


The Union of Concerned Scientists, perhaps?


Oh I don't doubt they are scientists but they are scientists with an
agenda. Would you consider a scientist that is incapable of being
objective a *good* scientist?
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
V-4 Missile Possibilities robert arndt Military Aviation 42 January 23rd 04 05:40 AM
Australia to participate in US missile defence program David Bromage Military Aviation 40 December 13th 03 01:52 PM
Israeli Air Force to lose Middle East Air Superiority Capability to the Saudis in the near future Jack White Military Aviation 71 September 21st 03 02:58 PM
Airborne ballistic missile defense? Henry J. Cobb Military Aviation 1 August 20th 03 09:17 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.