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

quote:

---

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?

---

Is getting hit by an ICBM our biggest fear? The world as we know it would end if the lower 48 was hit by one.

quote:

---

The world as we know it would end if the lower 48 was hit by one.

---

Not really. It would be devastating to the area and cause issues regionally but nothing would "end." The fear of more and that fears affect on our lives would be the biggest thing felt by the vast majority of the American population

If a NK ICBM hit Baton Rouge tomorrow:


There are a lot of other scenarios though, id suggest playing around with it
Interactive map

quote:

---

Thanks,

Now I expect a knock at the door.

---

What door? The guys headed your way over nukes ain't got any interest in knocking ON doors. More like through them.

quote:

---

Now I expect a knock at the door.

---

I expect they will listen in on my Samsung Smart TV first and realize I'm not capable of launching a missle from North Korea.

I think it's interesting and informative to play around with that map and see what different nations weapons are capable of

quote:

---

EMP device would be more likely and harder to trace if fired from a sub.

---

EMP devices, Suitcase Nukes, Dirty Bombs are all significant threats to the entire nation.

Remember a couple years ago the Mexicans that hijacked the wrong truck from a hospital? Thought they were getting one worth some easy money medical metals waste. Instead they got the radiation therapy waste. They all died within 2 weeks from the exposure since they just HAD to open the containers to verify the news reports and police APB's.

Imagine what some terrorists or just a lone psycho nutcase could do with a truckload like that in a populous U.S. area. Would not even need to be explosive, just randomly dumped inside a city or something. Sure the perp dies, but how many would they take with them?

quote:

---

So why don't we shoot 2-3 missiles at an inbound warhead.. mathematically that should be a guarantee

---

We would. Multiple times if necessary

quote:

---

This cant be accurate can it?

---

It is accurate if we are to believe NYT who wrote a long piece about this a while back. They quoted a similar figure if memory serves. Yeah, just found it:

quote:

---

The decision to intensify the cyber and electronic strikes, in early 2014, came after Mr. Obama concluded that the $300 billion spent since the Eisenhower era on traditional antimissile systems, often compared to hitting “a bullet with a bullet,” had failed the core purpose of protecting the continental United States. Flight tests of interceptors based in Alaska and California had an overall failure rate of 56 percent, under near-perfect conditions. Privately, many experts warned the system would fare worse in real combat.

---

I recommend reading the entire article. We are in some serious shite with NK: LINK

its a hard task, I would think 56% may even be too high

What I do know was the air defense artillery used to take down mortar rounds that were fired on a fob I was at only worked about 45-50% of the time. That was on 2013