Pentagon May Never Declare NMD Finished

[SirNitram]

Linky

By Robert Burns
ASSOCIATED PRESS

2:32 p.m. January 13, 2005

WASHINGTON – The Pentagon may never publicly declare that its new missile defense system is fully ready to defend against long-range missiles aimed at the United States, but it already has a limited capability against a small-scale attack, a Pentagon official said Thursday.

The Bush administration's goal was to activate the system by the end of 2004.

Advertisement
"We haven't made a declaration that we are now hereby operational," said Larry Di Rita, spokesman for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. "I don't know that such a declaration will ever be made."

Even so, "We have a nascent operational capability," Di Rita said, adding that the focus is on testing and evaluating the system as it is improved and expanded and eventually put on 24-hour alert.

"It's limited," he said. "It's not what everybody wishes it may be, perhaps. But some capability exists, while you continue to improve upon the capability of that system."

Asked whether that emerging capability satisfies President Bush's goal for missile defense at this stage, Di Rita replied: "The system is what it is. And it will get better over time."

The spokesman did not explain why the Pentagon might never publicly declare the system fully ready. At some point the interceptor missiles will be placed on permanent alert – a condition in which they will be capable of being fired from their silos at any time of day or night, on short notice.

Rick Lehner, a spokesman for the Missile Defense Agency, which is managing the program, said the interceptors have not yet been placed on alert, and he did not know when they would be.

The most recent test of the system, on Dec. 15, encountered a last-minute problem. The interceptor missile that was to be launched in pursuit of a target missile carrying a mock warhead was never fired. Di Rita said that setback had nothing to do with the decision not to declare the system "operational."

Air Force Lt. Gen. Henry A. Obering, director of the Missile Defense Agency, told reporters on Wednesday that the Dec. 15 test will be redone in mid-February, and additional tests in April, July and September will proceed as planned.

The missile defense system will initially rely on interceptors based in underground silos at Fort Greely, Alaska, and Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif., as well as radars in Alaska, California, at sea aboard ships with Aegis radars, and in orbit.

I'll endeavour to stay out of this one, but thought it should be brought up.

[Falkenhayn]

I'm having trouble deciphering what is being said here.

What is being put across in the article sounds like, we have a nuclear missile defense system in place, we just don't put much faith in its ability to shoot down nuclear missiles.

WASHINGTON – The Pentagon may never publicly declare that its new missile defense system is fully ready to defend against long-range missiles aimed at the United States, but it already has a limited capability against a small-scale attack, a Pentagon official said Thursday.

Definitely reassuring. Not even the five hundred dollar screwdriver mafia at the Pentagon would put money on this thing.

Are "long range missiles" reporterspeak for ICBMs, or a bad proxy for Nuclear Blitzkrieg?

[Chmee]

It's a precursor to the 'Go Fish' strategy they'll be using when Congressional oversight committees try to make budgetary decisions.

"Has the system advanced to the point where it can distinguish between real warheads and decoys in a MIRV attack, General?"

"Go fish, Senator."

[phongn]

I figure they'll eventually declare the system operational if only for PR, though it'll be awhile until it gets there. Several GBIs have already been emplaced in silos in Alaska but the radars are not completely done yet so it'll take time for full operational capacity.

As for some of the text in that quote, to the best of my knowledge the SPY-1 (the so-called "Aegis Radar") will not be used for NMD and the satellites in orbit use IR or IIR sensors, not radar.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

I think the idea here is to create uncertainty in any potential attacker. For instance, Kim Jong-il would now have to ask himself "is this going to work, or not?" if he contemplates launching at us.

[Lusankya]

I'd like to think that it meant that they were going to continuously upgrade it... but heh.

[Sea Skimmer]

As for some of the text in that quote, to the best of my knowledge the SPY-1 (the so-called "Aegis Radar") will not be used for NMD and the satellites in orbit use IR or IIR sensors, not radar.

SPY-1 doesn't have the performance for the job by a long shot. I suspect whoever wrote the article is either just very confused over the various BMD programs the US military has, or they directly confused AEGIS with the sea based X band radar, which is part of NMD program. That radar is a giant phased array, and SPY-1 is X band, but the two don't have much of anything besides that in common.

[HemlockGrey]

OK, so tell me why we would want Kim Jong-Il to have to wonder about whether or not the thing will work. If it has flaws, and he decides, "Eh, it must not work," and a few birdies slip through, we're proper fucked. I don't see why we just shouldn't say "Oh, it fucking works, and if we even see some odd-looking blimps sailing towards California, you're gonna be fucking nicked."

[Medic]

So, as controversial as it is, large-scale acquisition of the Raptor is less important than some problem-ridden ABM shield?
Crusader and Commanche I can see but an ABM shield? How is this not a "cold war relic?"

I remember a USAF officer defending the Raptor in a discussion, saying how many billions of dollars do we spend every year on missiles and anti missile defenses. ABM and Patriot and an airborne laser and the new Aegis-based ABM (granted, in the launch phase only). All of these are researched and funded at no small cost and eventually procured just in case we need them. There is no gaurantee we ever will.
But then you have the Raptor, something that takes the fight to the enemy, and you know that during any conventional conflict you will use it.

Sorry for the thread hijack / gratuitous rant. It had to come out and this was the best subject I've seen recently without digging up a week old one on the Raptor.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

OK, so tell me why we would want Kim Jong-Il to have to wonder about whether or not the thing will work. If it has flaws, and he decides, "Eh, it must not work," and a few birdies slip through, we're proper fucked. I don't see why we just shouldn't say "Oh, it fucking works, and if we even see some odd-looking blimps sailing towards California, you're gonna be fucking nicked."

Think of it sort of like the Israelis refusing to confirm or deny that they have nuclear weapons.

[MKSheppard]

There is no gaurantee we ever will.

The costs of the programs are far far less than cleaning up after a
nuclear initation by a hostile state on our troops or territory.

[HemlockGrey]

Think of it sort of like the Israelis refusing to confirm or deny that they have nuclear weapons.

Uh...I don't get that either, except that the Israelis get the benefits of nuclear deterrence without having to deal with any pesky regulators or anti-nuclear organizations/treaties.

[Meest]

To me it sounds like "if a missile happens to get through it's not our fault we weren't fully operational, but if we do stop a missile we rule!" typical we can never do wrong stance.

[Medic]

There is no gaurantee we ever will.

The costs of the programs are far far less than cleaning up after a
nuclear initation by a hostile state on our troops or territory.

Or the ROK or Japan's territory. I honestly didn't consider this at first. (strange too b/c I often joke to my friends that I'm gonna be nuked)
Your position is superior and now that I think about it, my fear that the Raptor is going to be a silver-bullet weapon (due to its limited quantity) is exactly what these hostile states likely to use nukes have -- a silver bullet. If we make these weapons useless then all the better.

[MKSheppard]

Or the ROK or Japan's territory.

Japan has signed onto AEGIS BMD and the SM-3 program, they'll get
it at sea in about 2007. Having North Korean ICBMs sailing over you
wakes you up mighty quick.