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 (707168)	4/3/2013 11:17:19 AM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1583331

You are the one who is FOS. The systems that have been developed often fail to shoot down targets even when the test environment is greatly simplified. So we don't really know what would happen with real threats. As to NK, they are just doing their usual posturing. It may be that this time they are preparing to give up on their.nuclear program. Three tests and none of them being fully successful has got to have impacted their supply of nuclear scientists...

To: i-node who wrote (707168)	4/3/2013 3:41:41 PM
From: bentway	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1583331

"The research has been productive in that it directly resulted in whatever missile defense we have" Wrong. We have systems that can SOMETIMES down ABM's. They weren't developed from SDI: en.wikipedia.org "IntroductionOn 15 October 1964 the U.S. Secretary of Defense directed that the Army Air Defense System for the 1970s (AADS-70s) program name be changed to Surface-to-Air Missile, Development (SAM-D). [7] In 1975 the SAM-D missile successfully engaged a drone at the White Sands Missile Range. During 1976, it was renamed the PATRIOT Air Defense Missile System. The MIM-104 Patriot would combine several new technologies, including the phased array radar and track-via-missile guidance. Full-scale development of the system began in 1976 and it was deployed in 1984. Patriot was used initially as an anti-aircraft system, but during 1988 it was upgraded to provide limited capability against tactical ballistic missiles (TBM) as PAC-1 (Patriot Advanced Capability-1). The most recent upgrade, called PAC-3, is a nearly total system redesign, intended from the outset to engage and destroy tactical ballistic missiles." We have some systems supposedly that can handle single ICBM's, that ALSO weren't developed from SDI: " Current counter-ICBM systemsThere are only two systems in the world that can intercept ICBMs. Besides them, many smaller systems exist (tactical ABMs), that generally cannot intercept intercontinental strategic missiles, even if within range—an incoming ICBM simply moves too fast for these systems. The Russian A-35 anti-ballistic missile system for defense of Moscow, whose development started in 1971. Presently active, it is called A-135and uses Gorgon and Gazelle missiles with nuclear warheads. The U.S. Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD; previously known as National Missile Defense – NMD) system has recently reached initial operational capability. Instead of using an explosive charge, it launches a kinetic projectile. *The George W. Bush administration accelerated development and deployment of a system proposed in 1998 by the Clinton administration*. The system is a dual purpose test and interception facility in Alaska, and in 2006 was operational with a few interceptor missiles. The Alaska site provides more protection against North Korean missiles or launches from Russia or China, but is likely less effective against missiles launched from the Middle East. President Bush referenced the 9/11 attacks and the proliferation of ballistic missiles as reasons for missile defense. The current GMD system has the more limited goal of shielding against a limited attack by a rogue state."