Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

If the US can bring down all the missiles thrown at it..why bother?

page: 1
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 02:28 AM
link   
If the US can bring down any missile North Korea launches, why even bother about this war?


Is the defence system as advertised by the Media?

From what I have seen from the Israel - Palestinian aggressions , Israel were capable of intercepting most of the rockets thrown at it...like 90% success (correct me if im wrong), and I think its more difficult to intercept short range small rockets, so large long range ballistic missiles like north Korea has should pose no risk at all




posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 02:31 AM
link   
Becuz when we shoot it down it gives us a reason. Just like us shooting down the Iraq WMD's.



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 02:39 AM
link   
Because 10% is a hell of a failure rate when nuclear warheads could be involved .



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 02:42 AM
link   
Because its not acceptable to have countries like north Korea launching ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads?



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 02:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by benrl
Because 10% is a hell of a failure rate when nuclear warheads could be involved .


yes i know..but it it advertised there is no chance of fail..

long range missile I think you have more than one chance to destroy it..

the tracking systems is advertised to be perfect



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 02:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by muse7
Because its not acceptable to have countries like north Korea launching ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads?


what i meant is why all the fuss when the nuke can be intercepted



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 02:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by benrl
Because 10% is a hell of a failure rate when nuclear warheads could be involved .


Well said, star for you.

In reality it is all about the Military Industrial Complex and $Billions and $Billions in profits. Scare the public get $Billions for the defense systems and the go to war anyway and make $Billions from the use once and buy another bomb / missile / bullet.

Then all the other Multinationals get their snouts in the trough of $$$$ for services to the troops and reconstruction work that in the end is left non functional, but they get paid anyway.

P



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 02:49 AM
link   
reply to post by heineken
 


If a man tells you he's going to kill your family, you don't take it lightly, even if you have a 90% chance to intercept his bullets. North Korea needs to stop threatening other countries, it's putting everyone on edge.



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 02:58 AM
link   
Shooting down long range missiles is significantly harder. An ICBM moves at such speed that interceptor missiles can't catch it. The only way to "kill it" is blowing it up during launch (30 second window) or during reentry (120ish second window). While Patriot missiles have like a 90% success rate against Scuds they are not effective against ICBMs. Our land based reentry phase missile defense systems have much poorer record of success and are obviously not combat tested. Our naval assests are pretty strong and we should be able to destroy a launched missile in during the launch phase. The AEGIS is not designed to kill ICBM's but it has likely been modified to be effective against them to some extent.
edit on 13-4-2013 by IndianaJoe because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 03:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by heineken
If the US can bring down any missile North Korea launches, why even bother about this war?


Any war with us being involved costs money and imho our economy would suffer AGAIN for a war the world does not really need. thats what bothers me, along with the small IF you placed there, cause IF a missile defense is 100% effective it must be one that has not been build, yet.


Originally posted by heineken
Is the defence system as advertised by the Media?


The defense systems ar not as advertised by the media. The defense systems is being advertised by the media the way the media understood it.
Unfortunatly the media understands alot about everything but it depends on interpretation, which is not always too much accurate


Originally posted by heineken
From what I have seen from the Israel - Palestinian aggressions , Israel were capable of intercepting most of the rockets thrown at it...like 90% success (correct me if im wrong), and I think its more difficult to intercept short range small rockets, so large long range ballistic missiles like north Korea has should pose no risk at all


as you see there is a uncertainity of 10%.
the chances intercepting a missile grows with its size, and falls with its speed.
NoKo basically relies on outdated russian missiles, and in russian hands these were accurate and precise enough to keep us thinking WE should have armed forces as if there would be no tomorrow.
So if NoKo decides to launch its missiles SoKo will suffer alot from it.
We can just hope that NoKo recognizes that there are multilateral treaties which would allow japan and US to directly engage on an attack.
If NoKo is even stupid enough to launch a nuclear first strike, it might get wiped off the map even by china which is already pulling together troops at the NoKo border.



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 03:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by IndianaJoe
Shooting down long range missiles is significantly harder. An ICBM moves at such speed that interceptor missiles can't catch it. The only way to "kill it" is blowing it up during launch (30 second window) or during reentry (120ish second window). While Patriot missiles have like a 90% success rate against Scuds they are not effective against ICBMs. Our land based reentry phase missile defense systems have much poorer record of success and are obviously not combat tested. Our naval assests are pretty strong and we should be able to destroy a launched missile in during the launch phase. The AEGIS is not designed to kill ICBM's but it has likely been modified to be effective against them to some extent.
edit on 13-4-2013 by IndianaJoe because: (no reason given)


this is the information needed ..thank you sir..

not to be rude...can you provide some link to verify your data?



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 03:05 AM
link   
reply to post by TMJ1972
 


Do you people really believe that the US gov't has our safety as their number 1 priority? They want the US destroyed - they've been doing it for years. Financially, socially, morally, militarily?

They want WW3, and somebody in the US is going to take a big, ugly hit.

Beyonce and jayz were just down in cuba saying how wonderfuly living in tyranny is.

Rodman was just in NK saying how wonderful that country is run.

Come on, people, wake up!



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 03:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by DestroyDestroyDestroy
reply to post by heineken
 


If a man tells you he's going to kill your family, you don't take it lightly, even if you have a 90% chance to intercept his bullets. North Korea needs to stop threatening other countries, it's putting everyone on edge.


sorry but there is a misunderstanding here...maybe its fault of my english ..

what i mean is..


Why scare people about something which i not a threat..since as advertised..they can track and destroy missiles..so y scare people about it..you just put up defence systems and its ok..

but now data is emerging that there no technology yet capable of intercepting long range nuke armed ballistic missiles..

are you with me now?



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 03:08 AM
link   
reply to post by heineken
 


Because it isn't about acknowledging the defense system --- rather bolstering fear; the best distraction known in politics.



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 03:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Happy1
 


These idiot democrats propaganda is so childish and laughable - They REALLY believe that the US citizens are this STUPID!

Look what they've done in Newtown, CT. They will do anything to further their aims.

John #ing Kerry as secretary of state? Come, on.



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 03:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by IndianaJoe
Shooting down long range missiles is significantly harder. An ICBM moves at such speed that interceptor missiles can't catch it. The only way to "kill it" is blowing it up during launch (30 second window) or during reentry (120ish second window). While Patriot missiles have like a 90% success rate against Scuds they are not effective against ICBMs. Our land based reentry phase missile defense systems have much poorer record of success and are obviously not combat tested. Our naval assests are pretty strong and we should be able to destroy a launched missile in during the launch phase. The AEGIS is not designed to kill ICBM's but it has likely been modified to be effective against them to some extent.
edit on 13-4-2013 by IndianaJoe because: (no reason given)



i think this is the post we have to focus on...

im at work so i cant carry our any research...can any one verify if long range ballistics missiles can be intercepted?



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 03:17 AM
link   
Missiles are not the only danger.

North Korea has massive long range artillery, which can be used to bombard South Korea to the stone age. North Korea also has 10 Golf II Class submarines that can launch ballistic missiles, though these are Cold War technology.



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 03:28 AM
link   
ICBM = most capable types are MIRV (Multiple Independent Re-Entry Vehicle) this is a concept where each missile has multiple payloads with a mix of warheads and decoys. Usually, more decoys than warheads, since the more modern missiles are SUPER expensive, the thinking (as idiotic as it is) is that if your going to spend all that money and sweat on maintaining these things, then it had better reach it target.. The higher and faster you launch them, the less likelihood you can intercept them. It's better to get them before the warhead section 'blossoms' as previously stated above, in the boost stage, this is what the U.S. anti-missile systems currently try to do. The problem with a ballistic missile, is it doesn't 'orbit' the warheads, it just lobs them at a point on the face of the Earth, getting out of the atmosphere is what kills the range, the smaller the booster, the 'smaller' the arc of the throw, the lower the range. The DPRK 'rockets' aren't that powerful, yet, but they are making them bigger all the time. They're warhead technology isn't really sophisticated, mostly they are trying to make sure, at a minimum, it goes off if they use it. When DPRK begins building MIRV capable missiles, that's a sleepless night right there. The bad thing about the MIRV, decoys are configured to proceed the actual warheads back into the atmosphere, and may be configures as electronic warfare or EMP device. The problem being, the radars and sensors needed to put the interceptor missile and the warhead in the appropriate 3D space where the warhead of the interceptor can reach a point lethal to the warhead, if the decoys can degrade these sensors, odds are, the warhead gets through.So the problem then becomes, which is the decoy, which is the warhead, and what type of decoys are deployed. Most of the modern sophisticated MIRV's carry Electronic warfare, EMP, Electro Optical, and Thermal countermeasures. If these things start flying, I'm not worried, where I live is in a DEFINITE kill zone. I'm gonna pour me a drink, sit back, and wait for the nuclear anesthetic to take effect. Hope this helps.
edit on 13/4/2013 by CarbonBase because: Spelling and Good Night! See ya ATS some other time!



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 03:36 AM
link   
reply to post by CarbonBase
 


good info right there,...star for u sir



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 03:50 AM
link   
at least now I can conclude that nuclear armed long range ballistic missiles are a big threat

there is no way yet to intercept and destroy the payload before it hits the ground

I agree now we (The World) needs to trash North Koreans..we cant let mad regimes threaten the security of the whole planet





new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join