Physicist blows whistle on US missile defence

OT: anything goes!

Moderator: Edi

User avatar
The Black Jesus
Youngling
Posts: 75
Joined: 2003-01-02 09:09pm

Post by The Black Jesus »

its all about numbers, my furry little friends
Back by popular demand! DAAAAAAAAAA-AAAMN!

h to the c to the 5 4 3 rush limbaugh in a tulip dress DEEEEE
User avatar
phongn
Rebel Leader
Posts: 18487
Joined: 2002-07-03 11:11pm

Post by phongn »

Ted wrote:
The Duchess of Zeon wrote:
Vympel wrote: And you know this ... how?
I've been told it. You probably wouldn't consider the explaination reliable so I'm not going to try and bother convincing you, nor to appeal for you to believe simply on my word alone: Continuing believe this scientist and the other sources as you desire, and under strict debating rules you would correct to do so. They are, however, incorrect.
Hearsay isn't acceptable in a debate, especially if you are trying to disprove stated facts of someone INVOLVED in the testing.
IIRC, the person in question she's refering to (I have a suspicion about it) has been involved in air and missile defense along with nuclear warfare for a good period of time, and thus I treat his comments with very high regard.

He pretty much stated that the whole problem with discriminating targets was solved in the 1960s and that (1) we've only improved from there and (2) the system routinely picks out our own decoys, which he asserts are the best in the world.
User avatar
Sea Skimmer
Yankee Capitalist Air Pirate
Posts: 37390
Joined: 2002-07-03 11:49pm
Location: Passchendaele City, HAB

Re: A key point which everyone forgets.....

Post by Sea Skimmer »

Ted wrote:
MKSheppard wrote:In real life, Mr North Korean ICBM would be targetted by not one but FOUR or more missiles.....
One is bound to get the kill....
NMD missiles ain't cheap, but compared to the costs of cleaning up after
a WMD attack.....
Yeah, but MRV's, you don't know which is real, which is decoy.
By the time you've made a workable decoy you having something that weighs as much as a warhead, that’s because it must have one inside of it to be effective. Unless you do that, thus defeating the point, its possibiul to tell them apart. And the technology to disseminate them from warheads is quite mature.

As it is in most tests the decoys don't even deploy properlly let alone acutally get tagged as warheads.
"This cult of special forces is as sensible as to form a Royal Corps of Tree Climbers and say that no soldier who does not wear its green hat with a bunch of oak leaves stuck in it should be expected to climb a tree"
— Field Marshal William Slim 1956
User avatar
Yogi
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2163
Joined: 2002-08-22 03:53pm
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Post by Yogi »

Wouldn't the deadliest type of missile delivery be not by ICBM but by suitcase?
I am capable of rearranging the fundamental building blocks of the universe in under six seconds. I shelve physics texts under "Fiction" in my personal library! I am grasping the reigns of the universe's carriage, and every morning get up and shout "Giddy up, boy!" You may never grasp the complexities of what I do, but at least have the courtesy to feign something other than slack-jawed oblivion in my presence. I, sir, am a wizard, and I break more natural laws before breakfast than of which you are even aware!

-- Vaarsuvius, from Order of the Stick
Ted
BANNED
Posts: 3522
Joined: 2002-09-04 12:42pm

Post by Ted »

phongn wrote:IIRC, the person in question she's refering to (I have a suspicion about it) has been involved in air and missile defense along with nuclear warfare for a good period of time, and thus I treat his comments with very high regard.

He pretty much stated that the whole problem with discriminating targets was solved in the 1960s and that (1) we've only improved from there and (2) the system routinely picks out our own decoys, which he asserts are the best in the world.
Well, how do we know who he is, etc... when she wont even mention his name? It is still HEARSAY unless we know who he is, and she hasn't told us, nor have you.
Go, tell the Spartans, stranger passing by,
That here, obedient to their laws, we lie.
Ted
BANNED
Posts: 3522
Joined: 2002-09-04 12:42pm

Post by Ted »

Yogi wrote:Wouldn't the deadliest type of missile delivery be not by ICBM but by suitcase?
Then it isn't a missile, it would just be a WMD.
Go, tell the Spartans, stranger passing by,
That here, obedient to their laws, we lie.
User avatar
Admiral Piett
Jedi Knight
Posts: 823
Joined: 2002-07-06 04:26pm
Location: European Union,the future evil empire

Re: A key point which everyone forgets.....

Post by Admiral Piett »

phongn wrote:The United States has enough nuclear firepower, even at post-START I levels to completely and utterly destroy the PRC.

The addition of ABM makes targetting for the attacker notoriously difficult. If they have a group of targets that absolutely must be taken down they must, essentially, launch as many missiles as neccessary so that no ABM will intercept them. Said missiles aren't exactly cheap.

Virtual attrition strikes.
Irrilevant for their purposes.They still have the capability to cause some harm to the USA,in the form of few blasted cities.They believe that that would raise the political costs of an intevention enough to dissuade the americans from ostacolating the pursue of their political objectives in Asia.
Mission accomplished.
Or so they believe.
There is no way an ABM system can achieve a practically 100% kill rate as soon as the number of warheads starts to rise beyond an handful.
And that it is all that matters for their goals.
Intensify the forward batteries. I don't want anything to get through
User avatar
Sea Skimmer
Yankee Capitalist Air Pirate
Posts: 37390
Joined: 2002-07-03 11:49pm
Location: Passchendaele City, HAB

Post by Sea Skimmer »

Yogi wrote:Wouldn't the deadliest type of missile delivery be not by ICBM but by suitcase?
A suitcase is a form of missile now? Perhapes if flug by catapult...

Aside from the tiny yields, sub kiloton, such devices are far to unreliable in delivery for a nation state to trust and are easily detected by hand held devices. The chances of a rouge group getting hold of such a compact sophisticated device are basically nil. The Russian ones which where missing where beyond there shelf life's and are very unlikely to function. Setting one off would give you a dirty bomb that emits alpha partials.

Horrors.
"This cult of special forces is as sensible as to form a Royal Corps of Tree Climbers and say that no soldier who does not wear its green hat with a bunch of oak leaves stuck in it should be expected to climb a tree"
— Field Marshal William Slim 1956
User avatar
Pu-239
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4727
Joined: 2002-10-21 08:44am
Location: Fake Virginia

Post by Pu-239 »

How bout sticking one in a shielded truck? Or a boat?

ah.....the path to happiness is revision of dreams and not fulfillment... -SWPIGWANG
Sufficient Googling is indistinguishable from knowledge -somebody
Anything worth the cost of a missile, which can be located on the battlefield, will be shot at with missiles. If the US military is involved, then things, which are not worth the cost if a missile will also be shot at with missiles. -Sea Skimmer


George Bush makes freedom sound like a giant robot that breaks down a lot. -Darth Raptor
User avatar
Gil Hamilton
Tipsy Space Birdie
Posts: 12962
Joined: 2002-07-04 05:47pm
Contact:

Post by Gil Hamilton »

phongn wrote:IIRC, the person in question she's refering to (I have a suspicion about it) has been involved in air and missile defense along with nuclear warfare for a good period of time, and thus I treat his comments with very high regard.

He pretty much stated that the whole problem with discriminating targets was solved in the 1960s and that (1) we've only improved from there and (2) the system routinely picks out our own decoys, which he asserts are the best in the world.
And who is this mysterious source that you and the good Duchess have yet to attach a name to? Unless you pony up a name and information, not only is it an appeal to authority, but an appeal to a nameless authority, which is much worse as it's hearsay.

Really, with the first things coming out of the Duchy of Paranoia being cries of liberalism and references to a source she won't name or even provide information about, I'm suprised you bothered to defend her.
User avatar
Exonerate
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4454
Joined: 2002-10-29 07:19pm
Location: DC Metro Area

Post by Exonerate »

I think that the missile defense system is a waste of money... Even with an improved one, a MAD scenario would still be in effect. Yes, it would provide limited protection from rogue states such as North Korea, etc, but they wouldn't do that without serious provokation. If they launch an ICBM, then we know who launched it, and will be able to retaliate. If they sneak in a nuke, then detonate it, its harder to trace, and probably requires less expertise too.

BoTM, MM, HAB, JL
User avatar
Exonerate
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4454
Joined: 2002-10-29 07:19pm
Location: DC Metro Area

Post by Exonerate »

Sea Skimmer wrote:
Yogi wrote:Wouldn't the deadliest type of missile delivery be not by ICBM but by suitcase?
A suitcase is a form of missile now? Perhapes if flug by catapult...

Aside from the tiny yields, sub kiloton, such devices are far to unreliable in delivery for a nation state to trust and are easily detected by hand held devices. The chances of a rouge group getting hold of such a compact sophisticated device are basically nil. The Russian ones which where missing where beyond there shelf life's and are very unlikely to function. Setting one off would give you a dirty bomb that emits alpha partials.

Horrors.
I believe that the largest yield for a suitcase bomb would be 1kt, most likely lower, and there are 100 missing (Keep in mind, this figure is from apocalpyse fundies...)

BoTM, MM, HAB, JL
User avatar
phongn
Rebel Leader
Posts: 18487
Joined: 2002-07-03 11:11pm

Post by phongn »

Gil Hamilton wrote:
phongn wrote:IIRC, the person in question she's refering to (I have a suspicion about it) has been involved in air and missile defense along with nuclear warfare for a good period of time, and thus I treat his comments with very high regard.

He pretty much stated that the whole problem with discriminating targets was solved in the 1960s and that (1) we've only improved from there and (2) the system routinely picks out our own decoys, which he asserts are the best in the world.
And who is this mysterious source that you and the good Duchess have yet to attach a name to? Unless you pony up a name and information, not only is it an appeal to authority, but an appeal to a nameless authority, which is much worse as it's hearsay.
Stuart Slade, in this case. (You're right, I should have posted his name).
User avatar
phongn
Rebel Leader
Posts: 18487
Joined: 2002-07-03 11:11pm

Re: A key point which everyone forgets.....

Post by phongn »

Admiral Piett wrote:
phongn wrote:The United States has enough nuclear firepower, even at post-START I levels to completely and utterly destroy the PRC.

The addition of ABM makes targetting for the attacker notoriously difficult. If they have a group of targets that absolutely must be taken down they must, essentially, launch as many missiles as neccessary so that no ABM will intercept them. Said missiles aren't exactly cheap.

Virtual attrition strikes.
Irrilevant for their purposes.They still have the capability to cause some harm to the USA,in the form of few blasted cities.They believe that that would raise the political costs of an intevention enough to dissuade the americans from ostacolating the pursue of their political objectives in Asia.
Mission accomplished.
Or so they believe.
There is no way an ABM system can achieve a practically 100% kill rate as soon as the number of warheads starts to rise beyond an handful.
And that it is all that matters for their goals.
You're correct, they'll have some capability to cause harm. However, said capability now has less of a probability of actually doing that harm - and the aggressor nation will likely take that into consideration, increasing the chances that they'll decide otherwise.

They hit the United States with nuclear devices, they know that the Assured Destruction doctrine (MAD is not the US nuclear doctrine) will invoke and result in a somewhat glowing mainland China. OTOH, they don't know how effective their strike will be - will the system target the missiles? the decoys? malfunction? miss?
User avatar
phongn
Rebel Leader
Posts: 18487
Joined: 2002-07-03 11:11pm

Post by phongn »

Anyways, one other reason I like ABM (besides the whole "counter the rogue nation" bit) is that it buys time for the national command authorities to make a decision in the accidential launch scenarios - a good thing.
User avatar
Admiral Piett
Jedi Knight
Posts: 823
Joined: 2002-07-06 04:26pm
Location: European Union,the future evil empire

Re: A key point which everyone forgets.....

Post by Admiral Piett »

phongn wrote:You're correct, they'll have some capability to cause harm. However, said capability now has less of a probability of actually doing that harm - and the aggressor nation will likely take that into consideration, increasing the chances that they'll decide otherwise.


ABM would decrease the amount of harm.Only a limited number of warheads would get throught.But those would blast few cities.Of course the result would be a glowing China.But the point is: would you risk to find yourself in such a situation in first place for the sake of Taiwan/whatever?
It is a "who has the hardest balls?" game.They believe that theirs are harder than yours.
Intensify the forward batteries. I don't want anything to get through
User avatar
phongn
Rebel Leader
Posts: 18487
Joined: 2002-07-03 11:11pm

Re: A key point which everyone forgets.....

Post by phongn »

Admiral Piett wrote:
phongn wrote:You're correct, they'll have some capability to cause harm. However, said capability now has less of a probability of actually doing that harm - and the aggressor nation will likely take that into consideration, increasing the chances that they'll decide otherwise.


ABM would decrease the amount of harm.Only a limited number of warheads would get throught.But those would blast few cities.Of course the result would be a glowing China.But the point is: would you risk to find yourself in such a situation in first place for the sake of Taiwan/whatever?
It is a "who has the hardest balls?" game.They believe that theirs are harder than yours.
I believe that the PRC's leadership will act rationally with regard to nuclear warheads as they've done since they've had them. That means that they will not risk open warfare with the United States as the stakes are too high.

Essentially, this conflict between the PRC and USA (say, over the ROC) won't happen in the first place because the PRC does not want to escalate to nuclear war - even if they can take down a few cities (and that isn't even certain)
User avatar
The Duchess of Zeon
Gözde
Posts: 14566
Joined: 2002-09-18 01:06am
Location: Exiled in the Pale of Settlement.

Re: A key point which everyone forgets.....

Post by The Duchess of Zeon »

Admiral Piett wrote:
ABM would decrease the amount of harm.Only a limited number of warheads would get throught.But those would blast few cities.
Exactly, that's the entire point. Damage reduction. Nobody should expect it to be perfect.


I'm sorry I didn't post Stuart's name either, in retrospect it just made things worse, but considering the exact details aren't things he can give out, I thought it pointless.
The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. -- Wikipedia's No Original Research policy page.

In 1966 the Soviets find something on the dark side of the Moon. In 2104 they come back. -- Red Banner / White Star, a nBSG continuation story. Updated to Chapter 4.0 -- 14 January 2013.
User avatar
The Black Jesus
Youngling
Posts: 75
Joined: 2003-01-02 09:09pm

Post by The Black Jesus »

knowing the loveable military industrial complex, this appears to be nothing more than a plan to line the pockets of contractors and people in the defense industries

it doesn't matter one iota if the system is effective or not. money is money, and that's what they're in the bidness for.
Back by popular demand! DAAAAAAAAAA-AAAMN!

h to the c to the 5 4 3 rush limbaugh in a tulip dress DEEEEE
User avatar
SWPIGWANG
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1693
Joined: 2002-09-24 05:00pm
Location: Commence Primary Ignorance

Post by SWPIGWANG »

if ($$ reduced damage including cost of lives) * (chance of usage) < (Actual system cost)
then
do_not_build()
else
build()


Isn't that simple enough?
Post Reply