Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (30635)	10/1/2001 6:16:57 PM
From: cosmicforce	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

As a guy with considerable optics and control systems experience, I'd say even with the best technology we have like this is unlikely to be deployable en masse (certainly, not in a way that protects most of us.) You might be able to protect some cities and installations (I'd guess my town might be on many a strategist's list - just hope your town is too). The simple addition of decoys defeats most of these systems, whether kinetic or beam. There are physics reasons (namely diffraction limits) that limit how small a spot you can generate with lasers (and how well you can target an object), so a widespread beam or KKV technology is probably out. There are also treaty problems with all these systems. And considering the threats aren't coming from space these days, Reagan's system would have been outrageously expensive boondoggle that wouldn't have prevented a Sept. 11 - like event in any way. You have now seen the face of your enemy. These initiatives are relics of obsolete thinking and don't address the real enemies we face. Reminds me when there was a demonstration of the end of the battleship era by Billy Mitchell. The admirals all ignored the test data where a single plane dropped a bomb down the stack and sank the ship.