posted on Mar, 16 2013 @ 12:57 AM
Originally posted by Vasa Croe
I appreciate all the info some have posted. I still want to know why so many? Are these missiles that we as taxpayer paid an arm and a leg for so
inaccurate that we have to put 44 of them out to defend against a publicly denounced non-threat of a country. I understand there are those that feel
this is because of Russia or China, but 44 of these missiles is a lot unless they are so inaccurate that we need a few to make sure we hit the target.
However, 44 of these against an incoming "rock" would seem fairly adequate to at least break it up.
How do you know what the "correct" number is, how do you know it's "too many"?
As is my understanding, the current 30 systems would be suitable for a "limited" threat and it's also a fact that Obama cancelled the rest of them
back in 2009.
So..we live in a REAL world (no Nibiru and big asteroids coming in) where some idiot in NK makes REAL threats, which IMO entirely legitimates to beef
Chances are that in a theoretical scenario of an attack not each missile will hit, and yes, simply spoken "better safe than sorry".
The other speculation you're making is about some incoming space threat but you (and I assume everyone else in this thread) doesn't even know
whether this missile system would be suitable AT ALL to "shoot down" an incoming space rock. We cannot detect rocks up to a certain size and their
speed is insane, chances are we cannot "shoot them down" at all - aside from the question whether it would even make sense!!
What's better...one 200m boulder hitting somewhere and causing damage...or blowing it up and let 1000s fragments rain down which would IMHO be the
most stupid thing to do, ever.
If there will ever be something like a asteroid/space rock defense system it will LIKELY be in far orbit and attempt to destroy (or deflect) a rock
far out in space before it comes closer to Earth.