Many scientists and others believe not. Check out:

www.ucsusa.org/global_security/missile_defense/

www.commondreams.org/views/051100-101.htm

I believe it can and I am still dreaming of ideas to make a contribution.

We have to correct the time and effort investment imbalance between missile offense systems and missile defense systems. I believe that if you invest more time and effort in missile offense systems, you fear the enemy and moderately love your country. But if you invest more time and effort in missile defense systems, you fear your enemy and highly love your country.

Thank you for the information Zaphod58. What is your philosophy on the love of country and desire to develop missile offense systems versus missile defense systems?

The offensive systems will improve as the defensive systems improve. That's the way the game is played. Once you improve your defenses, the other team figures out how to beat them, and you figure out how to improve your defenses. I'd like to see the GBI system make huge improvements but it's got a long way to go still.

Of course it could work its a sound concept. People that say such a sound concept Could never work sound about as smart as people that said heavier then air flight was impossible back in the day IMO.

The easiest way to make it work would be to equip the anti-missile missiles with nuclear warheads which would vastly increase the effective destruction range of a intercept missile. Really if your defending yourself from a WMD missile attack you should be going for broke so its not out of the question to use nuclear weapons in this way IMO.

Isn't the Aegis System only for short & medium range missiles? So that wont be any use if NK launches there new missile at the US.

I think parts of the missile shield are bad, and some it good. I like the big radars that will be able to see the on coming missile/s, but I dont like having a rocket launch from the US to incept it in mid-air. To me it seems like the whole process would be much much easier to use lasers.

Missiles as a defense system I don't see working very well, as has been seen in tests. On the other hand the laser defense system will be very effective and I see it blowing the competition away, at least heating things up...lol.

Just my take on things from what has been tested and released. Maybe missiles with a more advanced guidance and targeting system would work better compared to todays and yester years developments. Tomarrows tech is always going to be more effective and efficent, so time will tell.

Besides, the information we have at our disposal, is what they want us to know. In other words, we don't know what they don't want us to. Control of information works well in places besides media.

Personally I see the hybrid laser program as the best option in a defense against missiles.

I've certainly been a big fan of the ABL (Airborne laser) system, probably because I know that the prime contractor and system integrator for that effort is the very best in the business.

But there are certainly some very daunting technical problems involved to ensure the program works over the range that it's suposed to and with reliability. Knowing that, even if you defeat nine out of ten enemy missiles, you have still condemned hundreds of thousands of Americans to death -- has to give you pause