NATO declares missile shield up and running

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
Now that if one side has a missile shield MAD is not gonna work. I wonder what the US would say if Russia lets say planted missiles in...Oh I don't know Cuba.

So you believe this missile shield to be invincible?

ICBM's with 9 nuclear warheads that splinter off in orbit can be taken out by this missile shield? Launch all what? 10,000 or so ICBM's that Russia has at the same time. Heck even 1,000 at the same time. Goodluck with that missile shield.

I think it's total bollocks if you ask me.

reply to post by SLAYER69

I said and I'll quote... "Tell me you read up on the old Soviet/WARSAW pact vs US/NATO scenarios? Because you always seem to think the West would just shake in their boots and run away. "

To which I will repeat again that the West does shake in fear. This is why we are building the Poland system and we do fear the afghan's eye to eye, heck we have to use remote drones on them because we are afraid to fight them on the ground, and when we do we have to have the most up armored MRAPs devised.

Originally posted by roguetechie

What about the fact that Russia is 11 TIME ZONES WIDE? are you saying that one Missile battery in Poland can cover launches from all 11 time zones? No that's impossible you say? Well gee there went the boost phase deterrence theory.....

What about Russia's boomer fleet? Can this single battery in Poland also hit those too? If so I seriously applaud the US government for it's technical genius.

But since this is reality not one of your deluded fantasies that is not the case.

Really your whole assertion that One missile battery in Poland will be anything but an inconvenience to a Russian missile launch is so badly flawed as to be laughable.

I don't think you understand how these systems work. They do not have to cover the entire width of Russia, they only have to be able to cover the width of the area being defended (like Poland).

These systems do not attack missiles during the launch phase, they attack them during reentry when they are close to and coming down towards the target.

SDI projects did work on developing systems that could take out missiles in launch phase but that's a tactical area defense system rather than a fixed position defense. The delivery device has to be within range of the missile being launched in a launch phase type system which is why it was built to be mounted in airplanes.

The shield system in Poland can defend against missiles launched from anywhere in the World regardless of the launch platform (sub, silo, mobile, etc). No matter where the missile is launched from it has to come to the same, much smaller area if it's going to actually hit Poland which enables a system of anti missile launchers to be placed across the country and provide protection.

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by sonnny1

 

I dont buy,for a second,America is trembling in Fear.

Of course we are. Why else would we place the missile shield in the first place? For fashion?

Don't use "we",use America.

Its a disservice to anyone who has boots on the ground.

Second, Its there as a deterrent. Period.

A big enough deterrent,to actually let all countries know,America and NATO,protects their own.

With Russia,and its lost satellites,having Nuclear weapons,this is actually beneficial,like if A rogue element decided to get their hands on one,or launch one.



Putin can be Angry,all he wants. Doesnt change the fact,its already in place,does it.......

reply to post by ecoparity


The Patriot of GW1 was actually adapted from an existing Anti-Aircraft system which they pushed into service as an Anti-Scud missile system. This is why some very large Scud parts made it through to their targets. Had the Patriot missiles hit a bomber or fighter then it would have been all over but because it was adapted for scud missiles. Simply hitting the missile and breaking it up in midair didn't mean large amounts of debris wouldnt fall on or near their targets.


Which is exactly what we saw happen and the systems critics point out as proof of it's failures, but as you have stated they have been continually upgraded

The west is not and does not shake in fear it's called protection of civilians hell it is easy to say Russia shakes in fear or they would have built all the fallout shelters they have.

BWAHAHA you do realize the Afghanis have had to start planting bombs because the kill ratios in actual firefights are so exceedingly one sided it was destroying their morale right?

During the early parts of the war it was a daily occurence to hear of massive firefights with 2 and 300 insurgents KILLED in afghanistan for 1 or two american WOUNDED.

Americans are so far beyond the Afghan's tactically and technically it was always a one sided fight.... How you could believe anything different is beyond me. But then again I know actual soldiers who have actually been there. While you .... read about the war on presstv.

The reason America uses drones is because we have such crushingly overwhelming air superiority we no longer feel the need to use manned fast movers which are more expensive but more effective.

As far as the MRAP's go ... yep the Afghanis plant bombs because they can't fight face to face... HUGE morale victory there for them I bet.

HOnestly your views are so skewed it's actually kind of frightening to talk to you and hear what you honestly believe.

reply to post by sonnny1


If WW3 does happen, then expect Poland to get smoked first and all countries on both sides get destroyed as a followup.

reply to post by neo96

The west is not is does not shake in fear it's called protection of civilians hell it is easy to say Russia shakes in fear or they would have built all the fallout shelters they have.

I did not know American civilians were in Poland.

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL


Dude there are American civis all over the world.

Wow didn't know?

Geez.

reply to post by roguetechie

BWAHAHA you do realize the Afghanis have had to start planting bombs because the kill ratios in actual firefights are so exceedingly one sided it was destroying their morale right? During the early parts of the war it was a daily occurence to hear of massive firefights with 2 and 300 insurgents KILLED in afghanistan for 1 or two american WOUNDED

And it is expected as they are a third world country with no real military and are resisting the most powerful nation. Their kill ratios are small because US forces are hiding in tanks when they fire and have better weapons.

As far as the MRAP's go ... yep the Afghanis plant bombs because they can't fight face to face... HUGE morale victory there for them I bet.

No they just don't have the technology to fight face to face. They are doing what they can with what they have.

Americans are so far beyond the Afghan's tactically and technically it was always a one sided fight.... How you could believe anything different is beyond me. But then again I know actual soldiers who have actually been there. While you .... read about the war on presstv.

How do you know where I have been? I could have been your commander for all you know numpkins.

reply to post by ecoparity


eco actually I was directly refuting points the professional has made. which is that the base in Poland is somehow a threat to boost phase missiles or Moscow.

I am aware of the fact that said system is not a threat that was the entire point i was trying to get across.

reply to post by neo96


So this Poland Missile 'shield' is designed to protect just the American civilians in Poland?

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by ecoparity

 

The Patriot of GW1 was actually adapted from an existing Anti-Aircraft system which they pushed into service as an Anti-Scud missile system. This is why some very large Scud parts made it through to their targets. Had the Patriot missiles hit a bomber or fighter then it would have been all over but because it was adapted for scud missiles. Simply hitting the missile and breaking it up in midair didn't mean large amounts of debris wouldnt fall on or near their targets.


Which is exactly what we saw happen and the systems critics point out as proof of it's failures, but as you have stated they have been continually upgraded

The failure rate on the original system was quite bad. It was used merely in an effort to keep Israel out of Iraq.

The modern versions use chemical lasers mounted on mobile platforms and the sci fi concept of a "force field" is actually closer to reality than the public has been told. Google the tank force field system developed by Israel for some light background. We still have kinetic kill vehicles for these systems but we're also already building "wireless" kill systems that can disable / destroy missiles without anything even touching them.

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL


Hell why you asking me since you know everything there is to know about everything.

Second.

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by sonnny1

 

If WW3 does happen, then expect Poland to get smoked first and all countries on both sides get destroyed as a followup.

Yeah....But that's all fairytale crap,Honestly.

It didn't happen with the Cold War,and it wont happen now. Putin is too worried on how hes going to spend his time,on the Black Sea,in one of his many Palaces,not some bunker,for the rest of his life.

Dude really..................

They make video games. Some great ones,that fit into your "version" of a story.

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by neo96

 

The west is not is does not shake in fear it's called protection of civilians hell it is easy to say Russia shakes in fear or they would have built all the fallout shelters they have.

I did not know American civilians were in Poland.

No actually there are POLISH CIVILIANS in Poland ... Nato is not just an American convenience organization it's a treaty organization of much more than just the Americans which you seem to fail to understand pretty regularly.

Beyond that so Americans are afraid of Afghani's who don't have the technology to fight us toe to toe?

Wait so how does that work?

You do realize you are looking more and more foolish the more you talk right?

reply to post by neo96


I am asking you because you said:

The west is not and does not shake in fear it's called protection of civilians hell it is easy to say Russia shakes in fear or they would have built all the fallout shelters they have.

So do you really think this is for civilian protection or for aggression? Plus which civilians are we protecting according to your theory.

If anything it has made Poland a major target.

reply to post by roguetechie

Beyond that so Americans are afraid of Afghani's who don't have the technology to fight us toe to toe?

That is very true dude, that is why we have to use MRAPs because of their tactics.

Originally posted by roguetechie
reply to post by ecoparity

 

eco actually I was directly refuting points the professional has made. which is that the base in Poland is somehow a threat to boost phase missiles or Moscow.

I am aware of the fact that said system is not a threat that was the entire point i was trying to get across.

I misunderstood then, sorry.

I really don't think Moscow is the prime motivation behind the deployment of these systems in Europe, however. Terror groups have been actively trying to build chemical and bioweapon missiles since the first gulf war and the technology has become so accessible there are many countries who will soon have the capability to strike Europe who we cannot count on to be phased by a MAD concept.

Also there are too many former USSR nations who have the capability to build sophisticated missile based systems. Given the history of the region I would say those fears are well justified. Too many cultures who cannot let go of past wrongs, the need for vengeance and ethnic / religion based warfare are still much too easy for these cultures.