Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

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

page: 2
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 03:57 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.


Thats the whole idea.. So USA, Japan and Sth Korea spend money on idol threats. He is laughing at them.




posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 05:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by heineken

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


Yyyyeeeeeeaaaaa, ok.

Link please.



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 12:18 PM
link   

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

Governments do NOT cause wars.

The real reason behind ALL wars is always concealed by lies.

Wars are a euphemism for mass murder.

If people KNEW the real reasons behind wars, they would never fight them.


"All war is based on deception." ~ Sun Tzu, The Art of War

My working hypothesis is that most wars/conflicts are orchestrated by this satanic cult. The same people secretly manipulate events on both sides to undermine "all collective forces except our own" and establish world government tyranny (a.k.a. "globalization.") In other words, an Occult Elite is waging war on humanity and we don't even know it. How They Control the World

“Most wars are engineered by the Illuminati to weaken civilization and create a global police state" The Illuminati want to own and control everyone. They want to be God. They contrived all the revolutions, the world wars, the Cold War, Korea, Vietnam, the JFK assassination, 9-11, Iraq and Afghanistan and the "war on terror." Does A Satanic Cult Rule The World?

One group and one group alone is responsible for virtually all wars and bloodshed on the face of this planet. The Synagogue of Satan



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by heineken
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


Not entirely true. The Ground Based Midcourse Interceptor is capable of hitting a warhead in flight, in the orbital phase. I used to have a great IR video that shows the incoming missile, and then the kill vehicle hitting it and blowing both of them up from a test. Great video, the only thing is that it's not 100% accurate, 100% of the time. They've had issues with the kill vehicle missing, usually due to system failures, as well as in one test the SBX not performing as hoped (although that has been corrected). In the latest non-intercept tests, they've "hit" 100% of the time (with no actual intercept planned, just testing all the systems to make sure they work together).



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 01:11 PM
link   
Because they could build a bomb into one of these,and sneak it off the coast completely undetected.

edit on 13-4-2013 by all2human because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 01:32 PM
link   
Because we can't shoot down any missile thrown at us. I don't have time to pull info right now but ill give you the short version.

We can hit short and medium range missiles with Patriot PAC 3.
We can hit short/medium/ with AGEIS based missile on Navy Cruisers/Destroyers that are so equipped.
We can hit medium to ICBM ranged missiles with THAAD and the AK and CA based interceptor missiles. Problem is there are only about 24 of those in ready launch silos. THAAD has to be transported and deployed.

In essence if the assets are deployed in theater we can defend against short and medium range missiles like what NK has thrown at our allies and bases. We can also shoot down ICBMs coming from the Pacific side, but only have 24 known launchers.

So a launch of say Even 10-20 missiles could probably be defended against.....an all out strike by Russia (which would be between 300 and 900 missiles ) would still devestates the US.



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by heineken
 


Here is a link regarding our Anti Ballistic Missile Defense which is somewhat critical of its effectiveness. The site gives a good overview and is from and excellent source.

CFR Report
(be sure to click the internal links which give more detailed analysis on each weapons platform.)

There are three phases of an ICBM delivery: Boost; Mid Course, and Terminal. Each phase has its own challenges and is dependent on unique weapons platforms to shoot down. The US moved to a multi platform approach after the "failure" of the SDI (star wars system) which sought a universal single system approach.

During the boost phase the enemy missile is moving slowly and is following a very predictable path. The problem is that the boost phase only lasts a couple second (watch any rocket launch to verify this). The AEGIS system and Airborne Laser (not in service, technically) are probably our most successful platforms for this engagement _ The problem is they need to be very close to the launch site in order to strike the ICBM before it accelerates to speeds which outrun the SM-3 missile and the range of the laser. It should be noted that the AEGIS was not even designed to engage long range missiles, but it could in theory be used to attack them in the boost phase, again this has not really be tested. Others speculate that drones could circle known launch sites and simply blow an ICBM up on the ground as its prepping for lift off. We likely have this capability but it's highly classified. Further, to use a drone you actually need to know the missile launch location prior to it being launched, which isn't always easy.

The mid course phase is the hardest to attack because the missile is moving at very high speed and can simply outrun missiles trying to intercept it. Some claim the new Patriot and the Arrow could be effective against an ICBM, but the system has not been tested as far as the public knows. More likely, the updated patriot and the Arrow have no chance of touching an ICBM, and are intended to intercept short range threats. The Ground Based Mid Course Defense is our best option. The system seeks to destroy the ICBM in outer-space prior to the ICBM deploying countermeasures during reentry. Unfortunately its an expensive and fairly immobile platform. The system has had some testing failures and we also simply do not have that many missiles. Pretty much the GBMCD is our only chance against an ICBM heading towards the US once the missile reaches orbit.

The terminal phase is where things get interesting. The terminal phase takes place when the warhead reenters the atmosphere. The GBMCD on paper is effective at this role, but in reality it would easily be spoofed by very simple countermeasures. The THADD system remains fairly secret, but it is likely capable of engaging long range missiles. It is pretty much a fast moving super advanced patriot battery which is capable of killing faster moving ICBMs. The way the system works is by using geometry to cut off the ICBMs reentry approach, therefore mitigating the fact that it is a slower moving missile than an ICBM. Unfortunately for the geometry to work out correctly the THADD system needs to be deployed very close to the ICBM launch site. The THADD would not protect against an EMP strike and is not intended to prevent a nuclear explosion but to actually cause the ICBM to go off in the upper atmosphere instead of an air-burst above a city. The THADD will only work against high apogee missle targets which are very close to the THADD system, anything on a flatter trajectory would be much more difficult to engage. Any missile from NK heading towards the US would need to take a flat apogee, therefore THADD would be ineffective in protecting American cities. We have recently deployed THADD to the area.

In conclusion, we are by no means totally safe from a nuclear/chem/bio tipped ICBM. It also all depends on the missile technology we are facings. We really don't know what NK has at is disposal. Our saving grace isn't our defense systems but rather the weight of the NK warhead. A light weight multiple independent reentry vehicle is likely impossible to counter once it is deployed in space, hopefully NK is nowhere near that level of sophistication, even though its over 30 years old.






Additional links

Enduring Illusion of Missle Defense

THADD

GBMD

Aegis SM-3
edit on 13-4-2013 by IndianaJoe because: (no reason given)
edit on 13-4-2013 by IndianaJoe because: (no reason given)
edit on 13-4-2013 by IndianaJoe because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by heineken

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


Who exactly is advertising it? Manufacturers, Media? There is always a chance to fail. Basically its better than trying to shoot it down the "old way" but not perfect.



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by heineken
 


I think one of the problems would be intercepting a nuclear missile and atomizing its payload of nuclear material all over the North American continent.



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 04:54 PM
link   

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


Yes but they are North Korean nukes.

That's like comparing an M80 to a party popper.

The US has M80s.

NK has party poppers.



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Miracula

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


Yes but they are North Korean nukes.

That's like comparing an M80 to a party popper.

The US has M80s.

NK has party poppers.



Do me this favor, go here

Nukemap

Enter your city, and enter 9 kiliotons.

In my city, thats the entire down town area gone.

Thats one damn destructive party popper.
edit on 13-4-2013 by benrl because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 05:05 PM
link   
Because it's not okay to live with another country threatening to kill your taxpayers with a WMD.

World domination, it means something to a country in a global picture. It means money ratings, it means better business deals, it means better tourism, and better quality runaways coming to your door. It means more persuasion at the United Nations.

Honestly, the idea that the US can bring down all the missiles thrown at it, that's a superhero myth. It's like baseball, balls will be thrown and the batter will not hit them all. No golfer gets a hole in one every time. The best people in the world still have to compete with one another.

It is the same alertness regardless of what nation is bringing the threats. Victory is fleeting.



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by heineken
 


The US couldn't bring down three slow ass jumbo jets that hit the pentagon and the TTs.

What makes you think they could stop a military grade weapon developed by China/Russia and sold to the NKs?



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Beavers
 


Because the US defense posture wasn't designed to defend against threats already inside the US. It was always set up to monitor incoming threats, and defend off the coasts of the US. Most radars used by NORAD inside the us are FAA radars, while the main military radars are placed near the coasts where they can see out as far as possible to monitor for bombers or missiles approaching the coasts and coming in.



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by benrl

Enter your city, and enter 9 kiliotons.

edit on 13-4-2013 by benrl because: (no reason given)


Yes, but then you would know where I was.



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Beavers
reply to post by heineken
 




Oh yes they could have.

They decided it was better to let evil play its course than cross the boundary for the first time of creating mass friendly casualties.

Better to let the enemy kill the victims of 9/11 than to kill them ourselves and prevent further casualties.

Your only option there is to stop it before it starts. Which is why the ignored memos were so important. Strangely enough one of the guys responsible for predicting it was transferred to WTC before it happened and he died in the event. Tell me that transfer wasn't evidence of Babylonic spiritual control over our world.
edit on 13-4-2013 by Miracula because: (no reason given)
edit on 13-4-2013 by Miracula because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Beavers
reply to post by heineken
 


post by heineken



Bee r

Alien in bottle.
edit on 13-4-2013 by Miracula because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by heineken
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


As long as we trash all the countries that threaten with pre-emptive nuclear strikes



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by all2human
Because they could build a bomb into one of these,


That is one scary looking piece of hardware.



posted on Apr, 13 2013 @ 07:40 PM
link   
The op has asked the following question, if the US can bring down a missile, why bother.

This is geopolitics at its best, a game of high stakes poker, the one who flinches loses. That is what this is, the NK have moved, we have responded, by moving resources, and making sure they are seeing what we are doing. It is posturing in an attempt to get the other side to back down, both claiming that they are correct, when neither is.

Language is the factor here, and it has to be specific, one wrong word and it could be seen as damming as a miss fired weapon across the border. Make no mistake, NK wants something and it wants it bad, but refuses to accept the judgment of the world, demanding what it views as its rights.

Like the days of the cold war, between the USSR and the US, it views war games as a step to a first strike, often mistaking such actions for acts of agression. China is caught in the middle, as it can not allow for another conflict to occure on the Korean penisula, neither happy with either NK or the USA. It has to walk a fine line, and right now is letting both sides know of its displeasure. Make no mistake the government of China, probably has been in contact with both sides on this issue to try to calm down this round of rhetoric, to turn off the flames, rather than see them fueled.

So both sides want to appear strong, neither wants to back down, the question is who is going to give first, NK or SK and the US.






top topics



 
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join