- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Gordon Chang - America's Anti Missile Defense System has a 56% failure rate
Posted on 3/12/17 at 3:34 pm to WeeWee
Posted on 3/12/17 at 3:34 pm to WeeWee
Still gives us a significant advantage and increases the likelihood we can retaliate, which increases the deterrent effect.
One of those things that other countries have to figure out how to account for, but will never be used.
One of those things that other countries have to figure out how to account for, but will never be used.
Posted on 3/12/17 at 3:35 pm to Sidicous
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.
Posted on 3/12/17 at 3:38 pm to Sidicous
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?
Lots of suitcase nukes went missing when the U.S.S.R. fell. Good thing our borders are secure.
Surprised one hasn't shown up with some bad guys yet.
Of course, the suitcase nukes have much smaller warheads than any incoming missiles would have.
Posted on 3/12/17 at 3:40 pm to MrLarson
quote:
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.
Pretty much answered the question right there. "End of the world as we know it" is only smaller than "End of the world, period".
Posted on 3/12/17 at 3:42 pm to MrLarson
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
This post was edited on 3/12/17 at 4:08 pm
Posted on 3/12/17 at 3:44 pm to Lsuchs
Thanks,
Now I expect a knock at the door.
Now I expect a knock at the door.
Posted on 3/12/17 at 3:47 pm to MrLarson
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.
Posted on 3/12/17 at 3:48 pm to ChexMix
EMP device would be more likely and harder to trace if fired from a sub.
Posted on 3/12/17 at 3:56 pm to MrLarson
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
This post was edited on 3/12/17 at 4:11 pm
Posted on 3/12/17 at 3:59 pm to Crimson Wraith
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?
Posted on 3/12/17 at 4:25 pm to ChexMix
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.
So why don't we shoot 2-3 missiles at an inbound warhead.. mathematically that should be a guarantee..
Posted on 3/12/17 at 4:27 pm to Friscodog
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
Posted on 3/12/17 at 4:29 pm to ChexMix
Everybody Gordon Chang tonight.
You know you thought it.
You know you thought it.
Posted on 3/12/17 at 4:30 pm to ChexMix
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
Posted on 3/12/17 at 4:39 pm to BestBanker
quote:
Everybody Gordon Chang tonight.
You know you thought it.
Sorry, early reservation at his brothers restaurant. Perhaps you've heard of his brother? P.F.?
Posted on 3/12/17 at 4:42 pm to ChexMix
its a hard task, I would think 56% may even be too high
Posted on 3/12/17 at 4:44 pm to Lsuchs
That is only immediate exposure.
It doesn't show fallout impact.
But in general you are right, impact of nukes are somewhat overstated by
It doesn't show fallout impact.
But in general you are right, impact of nukes are somewhat overstated by
Posted on 3/12/17 at 4:45 pm to ChexMix
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
Posted on 3/12/17 at 4:48 pm to lsucoonass
Put SM3s in neighboring friendly countries then. Where we don't have friendly nations have Aegis BMD destroyers with SM3s patrol, like we already do. They are very capable of knocking out ICBMs above the atmosphere during the midcourse phase of a hostile ballistic missile's flight.
I'm not as familiar with our long range ICBM land based defenses in the US, but if they can't hit them the above is our best bet until we develop something better
I'm not as familiar with our long range ICBM land based defenses in the US, but if they can't hit them the above is our best bet until we develop something better
This post was edited on 3/12/17 at 4:51 pm
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News