He also isn't adding 5000 missiles and 50,000 warheads. From a practical standpoint, same thing.
They can add weapons faster than we can build a BMD system.
And you don't REALLY believe this is about a system to shoot down 10 incoming, do you? And if it is a first step, do you expect to see the Pres announce that in the NY Times?
Not quite as bad, but similar to his promise to help Taiwan buy diesel subs, i.e, he can't deliver either one. He can't even deliver a BMD system within his own term of office.
But in either case I've argued that BMD cannot be effective.
I asked this before: Why not?
Probabilities of success. There is a pretty clear image the President/Administration builds that all incomings are intercepted. It's not possible. In the history of man there has never been a weapon system or defensive system that has not been made ineffective by some new system or tactic. It's difficult to develop any argument why this particular system would alter that historical fact.
You're pointing out the SUV and suitcase is in fact one of the answers. The Maginot Line was impenatrable. When the Germans went over it, the French didn't say, the Maginot line is still effective because it wasn't designed to defend against that attack.
. I know something about that; probably more than you because you would most likely not have access to the materials I did.
Sometimes it's a small world, we could compare DoD and DOE compartments, but let's just assume we're on equal footing there.
What I'm saying is that if such a thing occurred, no American gov't could stand that did not massively retaliate. If Japan or China get dusted, so be it. You are talking millions of American lives here.
Well China might not agree. So if you're willing to risk another n million lives for ...what? I'll show you, I'll make you glow and lose another n million from the Chinese.
BLEW UP IN THEIR FACES. And that is a major risk of pre-emptive strikes.
I like your logic here, in the previous section there is apparently no risk in executing a major nuclear exchange, but a pre-emptive conventional attack can blow up in your face. Which one has the higher probability of escalating?
Well, that was his claim.
What and you believe him?
jttmab |
