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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (491175)	6/27/2009 3:31:22 PM
From: steve harris	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575864

Bottom line is that yes, we CAN shoot down a NK missile with ease. not to mention the best way may be to not shoot down the missile at all, just leave it on the launch pad a pile of scrap iron... Use a Chinese manufactured missile.... :)

To: i-node who wrote (491175)	6/27/2009 5:25:32 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575864

"Your argument, in effect, is that our anti-missile capabilities are worthless" Not what I said. Just that they are not as far along as you seem to believe. This scenario has never been tested with anything other than the Arrow. Which isn't in place in Hawaii. Several Patriot batteries should have some success. But they would fire a lot more than the standard 3 or 4 missiles in a salvo. "But we have at least three viable approaches to shooting down any number of missiles they may be able to muster." Uh, no. We don't. Arrow could do it, but it hasn't been deployed to Hawaii yet. Patriot might do it, but we would have to rely on numbers to have any assurance. Aegis hasn't been tested for that scenario, it is still in development. It might work, but it might not. Assuming any complex system will work in an untested scenario is a fools game.