National Missile Defense-What's the holdup? Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : National Missile Defense-What's the holdup?

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 PreviousNext

To: brushwud who wrote (1)	2/25/1999 8:05:00 PM
From: nuke44	of 2

No, while decoys and chaff have been used on ICBMs for years, by us and the Russians. they are ineffective and with today's technology, easy to detect and defeat. One of the possibilities is to actually destroy the entire payload at apogee, before the re-entry vehicle separates from the payload support. If the Russians have complied with Strategic Weapons limitations as agreed, then they don't have any more missiles configured with MIRVs, leaving us with only one reentry vehicle per missile to contend with. The U.S. has already done this with our entire land based ICBM fleet. Even the fifty Peace Keeper missiles (MX) that are are based out of F. E. Warren Air Force Base in Wyoming have been reduced down to one warhead per missile when they are capable of carrying ten. And since we've complied with our part of the agreement, I'm sure Russia jumped right on the bandwagon and did the same. (Even though we don't have any concrete evidence that they have done so.) Right? Wrong. Which is all the more reason to curtail Comrade Bubba before he sells us down the river, lock stock, and barrel.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 PreviousNext