Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

US is defenseless.

page: 1
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 02:54 AM
link   
US antiballistic technology has failed again.

www.guardian.co.uk...

It is my belief that early successful tests were staged. There is no reliable method to destroy incoming nuclear ballistic warheads. This is why there has been no military action against North Korea despite threats of nuclear attack from their side.




posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 02:59 AM
link   
So, you found a test about a new system and think of it as a failure for all of our antiballistic systems? Please try to make at least some logic in a post that is easily debunked by just research. Check out our aegis sytem and our thaad sytem, then get back to us on how defenseless the US is.



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 04:41 AM
link   
I find it odd that this would lead anyone to assume we are defenseless,
this country is spending over half a trillion dollars a year on defense,
no other country on the planet spends even remotely close to what
we do. Yet somehow i continue to see people claim our military is
weak, cuts in military spending will spell doom, one project is not
going well therefore we everything must be bad.....

While i agree it would be nice to know this worked the way it was
intended to, we are far from defenseless......



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 04:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Adaluncatif
 


fifty percent success rate on what is still fairly new technology? I'd say that's fairly good, actually...

Not as good as one might like, of course, but not at all bad.

Defenseless? Not so much.



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 04:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Adaluncatif
 



The military has tested the so-called ground-based midcourse defense system 16 times. It has succeeded eight times, with the last intercept in December 2008.


Defenseless, not quite. But anyone is more than welcome to try.

As stated above, new technology with 50% success rate...and that doesn't count the ones that are working we know about OR all the ones that we don't even know exist.
edit on 7/8/1313 by Martin75 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 04:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Adaluncatif
This is why there has been no military action against North Korea despite threats of nuclear attack from their side.


North Korea doesn't have any missiles that can reach the US with any kind of payload, so why would this matter if it works or not? This isn't the only ballistic missile defense system the US has. It's the one designed to stop ICBMs,.



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 05:36 AM
link   
I am attached to a unit that spent $30,000 last year on masking tape.

You can probably guess where the budget cuts went, I'll give you a hint. It wasn't missile defense



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 05:44 AM
link   
reply to post by watchitburn
 


Thirty thousand on masking tape? Doin' a lot of painting, or something? That's a lot of tape...



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 05:47 AM
link   
Pfff.... ROFL


North Korea can simply win a war with endless amount of troops to shoot US army troops.
They don't need missiles, and the ones you shoot at them, would only kill innocent people.

I suspect most of Korea's soldiers wouldn't be in Korea if they would attack the US.

Anyway...

I'm glad no missiles were fired at anyone at all this time. I prefer that nobody should experience war.
Maybe some day.... we learn to co exist...



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Sinter Klaas
 

Wrong on so many levels.

North Korea doesn't have the logistics or even the food stocks to invade anything other than a blitz on the north of South Korea. Where is it you think they will be?



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sinter Klaas
Pfff.... ROFL


North Korea can simply win a war with endless amount of troops to shoot US army troops.
They don't need missiles, and the ones you shoot at them, would only kill innocent people.

I suspect most of Korea's soldiers wouldn't be in Korea if they would attack the US.


Let me guess..you actually think it's possible for a country to successfully invade the mainland US?
I am not talking nuclear or some other attack but using those endless amounts of troops to shoot US Army troops.
The ground based elements of Red Dawn (either the original or the worse remake) are not tactically possible.



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by opethPA

The ground based elements of Red Dawn (either the original or the worse remake) are not tactically possible.




Sure they are! With bad CGI and even a worse script!




posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 11:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Adaluncatif
 


With an offense such as they possess,


The defense is just for the public to feel safe.


Bottom line is you really don't need defense when your offense can obliterate all life on earth.

Who wants to mess with the man with his finger on the button?



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 11:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Adaluncatif
 


Why would anybody in their right mind attack the US anyway when they can just sit back and watch us slowly self destruct? Its not external forces that will nail us, we'll choke to death on hubris and self righteousness. That's not to say everybody falls into that category, just the people who "rule" over us.




edit on 8-7-2013 by frazzle because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 01:50 PM
link   
Honestly, the only country that can successfuly beat the US is the US itself. No country can stand if it's population is against it. As soon as your own army starts doubting their orders you are finished as a ruler. From there it's a natulal downward spiral of people waking up to the BS and there is no system that can stop that bomb.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Adaluncatif
 


Star Wars can target an ICBM traveling at well over 1000 miles an hour with an accuracy rating + or - 3 inches (size of a bagel bite). It can target up to 3 targets in 10 seconds and has over 100 active interception missles (some nuclear) to use.

We in the US keep the best technology to ourselves and sell the ones with less success to foreign nations.

The only way we are defenseless, is if the weapon is brought to our doorstep prior to launch (submarine, unchecked freighter etc.) Star wars needs a few minutes to activate, so the missle would need to be airborn for a few minutes which ICBMs certainly are.

There are scenarios where we are weak and defenseless, but ICBMs are not one of them under the current environment (unless the planned attack included dealing with Star Wars first).

God Bless,
edit on 8-7-2013 by ElohimJD because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by seagull
 


This technology was developed in the 80s. It was part of Stars Wars. It was a fraud then. It is a fraud now.



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 09:09 PM
link   
reply to post by LeaderOfProgress
 


US antiballistic systems have been a failure ever since Star Wars. It doesn't work. It is known that it doesn't work, but money is made. That is why tests are rigged.



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Monkeygod333
Honestly, the only country that can successfuly beat the US is the US itself. No country can stand if it's population is against it. As soon as your own army starts doubting their orders you are finished as a ruler. From there it's a natulal downward spiral of people waking up to the BS and there is no system that can stop that bomb.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



If this was true, why has the United States never attacked a country that possessed weapons of mass destruction and long range missiles? Iraq didn't have long range missiles, but they had weapons of mass destruction. The first war stopped short of Baghdad because chemical weapons scared the US. It took 12 years of almost daily bombings, weapons inspections, and sanctions before the US had the courage to invade again, knowing that there was no longer a threat. North Korea has weapons of mass destruction, but more importantly, they also have the means to deliver them. If antiballistic missile systems work, Kim Jong Un would not be in power right now. Everyone here can talk all badass they want about how awesome US missile defenses are, but actions speak louder than words. US actions suggest that these systems don't work.



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 09:19 PM
link   
You have a thing about Korea? All your threads are about it.
North was beat by US forces and without China we could do it in days,they would have to run underground and that would be a mistake too.
Look you have NO IDEA what the US has and really I can guess but I am sure you would not see the complete spectrum until it was REALLY needed.
Then you would see the offending country get dissected.






top topics



 
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join