The thread's objections to a SDI defense system so far have been argued on the notion that the scientific community is unable to develop a viable system...and points have been made stating that this the primary reason a system has not been deployed. Readings on the topic tend to address the political obstacles as much as, if not more than, the technical challenges.
Al,
From what I have read, a missile is capable of knocking out an air target...whether it be a missile, plane, weather balloon etc. I think where the technology is deficient is discerning between a nuclear loaded missile vs a weather balloon where there is a large number of incoming. From what I understand, it was that deficiency coupled with the collapse of Russia that led to the mothballing of star wars.
I am unwilling to accept that technical failure is a foregone conclusion. I believe (on faith) that a system at some level could be developed, though probably not 100% effective. I also accept the notion of rogue acts (UPS, Fed-Ex, suitcases, bomb in a bottle, etc..) which may not be defensable...and while possibly viable, such arguments don't justify not working on SDI. Russia or China would probably not deliver weapons that way.
Although I have not seen a percentage, I think the deficiency was much less than 100%.
ted |
