Gordon Chang - America's Anti Missile Defense System has a 56% failure rate

I wouldn't be surprised. Hitting a missile with a missile is doable. It's like shooting down an enemy fighter - the plane can try to evade the missile but the missile can change direction and follow it.

The big problem is ICBMs travel at an extremely high speed.

quote:

---

So we've failed to stop incoming missiles 56% of the time?

---

i would assume that our missile defense testing failed 56% of the time or at least thats what Chang said.

Sounds like fear mongering to get more govt money. Just go in and kill tater tot and most senior officials
If they get that capability.

Wouldn't be shocked. Just as a physics problem its absurdly tough even pre MIRV.

Most of the publicized successful tests were pretty hilariously rigged.

Well, there are tests. In 2016, the LA times reported:

quote:

---

The GMD system, which was declared operational in 2004, is designed to thwart a sneak nuclear attack by North Korea or Iran. It has performed poorly in test flights, failing to destroy mock enemy warheads about half the time — prompting many government and independent analysts to conclude that it cannot be relied on.

---

quote:

---

The nation’s missile-defense system has serious flaws. So why is the Pentagon moving to expand it? Despite a spotty test record, the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system has kept its funding and is poised to grow. A key reason: Rust Belt jobs.

By DAVID WILLMAN
DEC. 13, 2016 3:00 AM | REPORTING FROM WEST CARTHAGE, N.Y.

---

LINK

quote:

---

56% failure rate

---

Doubt it. Everything public is usually low balled when it comes to classified military capabilities.

Not sure what the land based defense system is but Navy BMD destroyers have a higher rate than that.

Anti ballistic missles are cheaper and smaller than the ballistic missles that carry more fuel and larger payloads. You won't shoot one at an ICBM, you'd shoot a volley at X% per missle. Then a second volley, and a third if necessary

Airborne Laser.

The one world gubment folks don't want us to have the capability to defend ourselves.

quote:

---

Gordon Chang author of "Nuclear Showdown" said that we have anti missile defense systems in California and Alaska that have a 56% failure rate and that North Korea will be able to hold America ransom once it attaches nuclear warheads to their ICBMs.

This cant be accurate can it?

---

Good enough for government work

Well, during Gulf War 1 against Saddam, the Patriot system had only tested as something like 40-50%. It did better when actually needed though.

A quick Google shows 70% in Saudi Arabia and 40% in Israel.

That's against a slow moving SCUD. I would not expect much better results for another system against much faster ICBM's. But, that's one of the reasons for a huge military budget.

How much spending till we do get a missile defense system that can ensure we as a nation don't get hit by ANY enemy? Where do we cut that off?