It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Pentagon: We Have A "Limited capability" to Intercept A Missile Fired From North Korea

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 01:52 AM
link   
A report issued by the Pentagon has stated that we have a limited capacity to intercept a missile fired from North Korea. The report issued by the Pentagon's chief weapons tester was delivered to Congress. However, he said that it was impossible to say with "high confidence" as actual testing has been delayed or failed. Eight interceptors, 6 in Alaska, and two in California, are in thier silos, but the system has not yet been put on alert.
 



www.cnn.com
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- President Bush's fledgling missile defense system should provide a limited capability to thwart a North Korean missile attack, the Pentagon's top weapons tester said in a report made available Wednesday.

A system "testbed" put together by Boeing Co. "should have some limited capability to defend against a threat missile from North Korea," Thomas Christie, the Pentagon's director of operational testing, said in his annual report to Congress on top U.S. weapon programs.

"Ground testing has improved our confidence that military operators could exploit any inherent capability that may exist in the testbed, if needed in an emergency," he wrote.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Living on the west coast less than 30 miles from what has to be a potential target, I think that any defense is better than "duck and cover". Yes the system is costly, yes they are working out alot of bugs, and yes we don't know it will work in an actual combat scenario, but I for one would rather have this than nothing. Also, those research dollars are not going to waste. People mocked Reagan's "Star Wars" program too, but the research that went into that has found hundreds of applications in the civilian sector. No doubt the same will be for this system.




posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 02:02 AM
link   
Better question, will we try to protect ourselves with technology or spend billions fighting another war?



posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 02:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Prince_Machiavelli
Better question, will we try to protect ourselves with technology or spend billions fighting another war?


No amount of technology could ever protect us with 100% certainty against an ICBM launched by North Korea. I'm glad I live in New York!

I think the best option with North Korea would be to launch all our B-2 stealth bombers in a coordinated attack on all their installations giving them no time to respond.



posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 02:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
I think the best option with North Korea would be to launch all our B-2 stealth bombers in a coordinated attack on all their installations giving them no time to respond.


The inherent problem with that scenario is that they guy is like a deranged mole and alot of the stuff is hidden and underground. He have almost no HUMINT on the country and are intierly dependant on satelite intel.

Also, say we hit thier nuclear depots, the ensuing radiation cloud will not make the Chinese, South Koreans, or anybody else in that region very happy either. I wonder if the FT. Greely interceptors could get a missile heading for Japan? Or Guam and Diego Garcia for that matter, or this is strictly Hawaii and the CONUS?



posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 02:20 AM
link   
I think it only protects Alaska, Canada and the Western coterminous U.S. I doubt Hawaii or Diego Garcia has any protection. There are no clear answers to the North Korean threat other than convincing China to invade, even then he may launch his missles at us.



posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 02:34 AM
link   
.
The so-called missile shield assumes the missiles will be fired from North Korea. All you have to do to foil this is put the missile under tarps on a ship. Move the ship within a few hundred miles of shore and fire it. That way there is not time to intercept it. Keep in mind this technique is available to anyone with a ship and a missile or two, Not just North Korea.

Try not to be lulled into a false sense of security FredT.

Buying an appliance before it is researched, designed and tested is such a wasteful way to use scarce government resources.

Oops I forgot all those big defense contractor contributions.
Donations will buy you a lot of pork.

If they had developed a EM wavelength intercept the response time would be much quicker and agile. Don't know what the possibilities are/were but the brain storming & research were never done.
.



posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 02:57 AM
link   
I have posted this article form American Scientist before.

It shows that in reality the Missle Defence shield is in reality about as useful as a chocolate teapot. Anyway, have a read, it is very interesting.

www.sciam.com...



The reason for the deployment is to counter the threat that a rogue state--namely, North Korea or Iran--will attempt to hit the U.S. with nuclear or biological weapons delivered on intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs).

But despite the more than $80 billion spent by the U.S. on missile defense since 1985, this system will not provide significant protection for many years, if ever. The political pressure to claim that the U.S. is secure against a rogue nation's attack has led to a defense that will not counter even the earliest threats from the emerging missile powers.



posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 03:23 AM
link   
The real question in my mind is: Can the missle defense shield protect America and its citizens from a false-flag nuke attack that would probably subsequently be blamed on Kim? I think the answer to that question is no, because the chain of command disallows it. In my mind that makes the missle defense shield useless.

What we really need is an effective defense against all the fevered egos in Washington, who make the world a more dangerous place to live in.

There is no question in my mind that Kim is a malcontent. However, that doesn't mean he has the capability or the desire to guarantee the obliteration of his father's country by attacking a trigger happy superpower with WMD nearing their 'use by' date.

Also, keep in mind his reaction when the Ryongchan railways martialling yard was bombed not too long ago. Kim probably had Chinese inteligence in his office within a half hour, restraining him from acting rashly, and keeping the leash tight so to speak to prevent any injury or threat to Chinese interests. If there was a false-flag op that led to N. Korea being invaded or bombed, China would probably continue with their very effective asymetrical warfare by undermining American economic interests in the Middle East, SE and Central Asia. This would cripple long-term American stability while at the same time allowing a comfortable distance for the Chinese. They don't want open hostilities, because they're not as good at that brand of warfare, history is clear on that fact, and the Chinese are no slouches at military history.

I'm amazed that people are still listening to what 'they' have to say. Remember, before 9/11 the Pentagon had 'complete capability' to knock down airborne threats, using more than a dozen SAM batteries scattered around the area. Strangely those missles forgot to function, and they were tested to the nth degree. Sorry, but I don't have a lot of faith in our official's ability to protect us anymore - especially not from the real bad guys (You know, the ones who steal a portion of your paycheck to pay for private wars, who demand blind and absolute obedience to their Hitlerian machinations, who ask for the lives of your sons and daughters in sacrifice to the almighty Dollar God, those bad guys.).



posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 03:25 AM
link   
ultimately it will be a string of those stratospheric blimps with mounted lasers radar and telescopes that will zap incoming missiles and perhaps trucks with illegals on the mexican border as well.

Lasers are the about the only thing with the short point-and-shoot response time that can intercept a missile smuggled with a trawler or a sub near the coastl;ines...


[edit on 23-1-2005 by Countermeasures]



posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 09:10 AM
link   
I can't believe someone would be that inept to believe we would even *try* to use our missle defense systems to "start" another war. We didn't start the war in Iraq, Saddam did. While the United States did fire the first shots, we were given no choice. We did the right thing, and anyone who believes otherwise...is just something I wont on say this site
.

100% pro war. 100% pro Bush.


[edit on 23-1-2005 by JBurns]



posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 11:00 AM
link   
All I can say is run for the hills or in this case to some underground bunker with enough supplies to last you a good long while.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join