Missile Defense System Test a Success

snake284snake284 Senior MemberPosts: 21,930 Senior Member
Just saw it on Fox News. Now ol' Kim Jong Un or whatever his name is better watch his peas and quews. We could drop one down his stack and do away with him without much threat to anybody else. We could use those non nuke big bombs and take his ass out. And Trumps just the man with balls enough to do it. This will no doubt straighten Putin up a bit, also. Everybody has a bomb, but only we have a defense for it. We now could rule the world, well with the exception of God of course. I'm hoping we take advantage of it. We could take out Iran, Syria, and N. Korea. Or we could give them an ultimatum that the Goat Humpers in Iran and Kim in N. Korea give up their power and step down and hand power over to more moderate people. Then what's his name in Syria needs to hand over power to a moderate and Putin give it up to a non com, Non Commie that is.

You see, I got it all figured out, cept that ain't gonna happen. Nobody got balls enough except trump to do something like that and I don't think even trump will do it without support. So we'll let the advantage of being the strongest in the world slip away until they come up with some other weapon and gives the ball to the bad guys again.
Daddy, what's an enabler?
Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.

Replies

  • BAMAAKBAMAAK Senior Member Posts: 4,319 Senior Member
    This was. The 17th test of that miss me. Only 9 were a success. And I would not be so sure about us being the only one to have it.
    "He only earns his freedom and his life Who takes them every day by storm."

    -- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, German writer and politician
  • earlyearly Senior Member Posts: 4,950 Senior Member
    I thought I felt a disturbance in the force.
    My thoughts are generally clear. My typing, not so much.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,930 Senior Member
    BAMAAK wrote: »
    This was. The 17th test of that miss me. Only 9 were a success. And I would not be so sure about us being the only one to have it.

    They claim this is as far as these tests have ever gone and it was a resounding success. We shall see.

    They had a version that they weren't sure would work in Poland and Obummer had it removed. He said he didn't want to upset the Russians. And then he got caught by a live mic telling a Russian official to wait until after the election and he would be more free to deal with them or something to that affect. And they're accusing Trump of Collusion? What hypocrisy.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • centermass556centermass556 Senior Member Posts: 3,509 Senior Member
    Snake, I wish we could have had this discussion Saturday

    I'm not going to try to remember what is open source and what is not. I will just tell you we have had this capability for a long time. This was a successful test of missile defense that involved a hit to kill vehicle (kinetic kill), similar to what we do in other missile defense systems we use. The US is not the only country that has a missile defense system.

    We can't leverage ultimatums. Especially when Russia is on the opposing side of the board. The last time that happened, WWI started. I'm not saying WWIII will start over it, but I know it will not be pretty. You have to think about this asymmetrically, especially when thinking about Iran, N.K., and others that may leverage unconventional means. Like, if I know I can't get my single ballistic missile through a pacific missile defense grid, then I place my bomb on a 747 and make it the missile. How easy is it to spoof an IFF squawk. Or, just come off of radar once you get past Hawaii and aim for LA. Then you have Russia and China. Do we have enough intercept vehicles to stop each missile they may launch. Remember it was the Russians who believed "Quantity has a Quality of its own". And lets not think about what would happen if they jammed our GPS as they launched.

    As we move forward into the 21st Century, we have to understand that we can accomplish just as much through non-traditional domains of battle. In years past we have only saw domains as Land, Sea, and Air. But as we go forward we have to understand that Space, Cyber, and economics offer other domains to conduct operations through. If you think about it, some of the more important changes in regime happened through the manipulation of economics. We just have to be careful with it since the world's economy is tied together.

    And back to Syria, can we identify why Assaad is bad? Yes he has come off the rails since his country has come apart at the seams,but can you recall anything he did before that? Can you say that he has done anything different than what the North did to the South in the Civil war, except on modern terms. Sherman's march to Atlanta was a "salt the Earth" campaign that targeted civilian farms and plantations. I know that is a little bit of a poor comparison, but look at his actions independent of what the media has told you. Should he have used chemical weapons strikes against rebels in civilian centers...no, but what choices do you have left when you are trying to hold your country together and a World Power (the US) is funding and supporting the rebels you are fighting. Obama chose to support radical rebels over an established and legitimate government trying to prevent another "Arab Spring" uprising. If Obama would have went in together with Russia to help Assaad, we could have forced changes through leveraged support.
    "To have really lived, you must have almost died. To those who have fought for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know."
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 26,188 Senior Member
    What Centermass said.

    And it doesn't have to be an airliner regarding NK. They have diesel subs and are diddling with sub launched missiles. A couple of refueling ships placed along the track from NK to the U.S. coast and even medium range nuclear warhead missiles would be near impossible to stop. And diesel electric subs can be made very quiet. Our fast attack subs might or might not find them in time.

    Obama backed the rebels against Assad and spent a few billions arming ISIS by proxy. And we're in Syria fighting ISIS. Assad's Muslim sect is a minority in Syria, like Saddam Hussein's sect was in Iraq. To keep power, both had to be pretty brutal to the majority Muslim sect to keep them in line. We've meddled in both countries, and they've both turned into a can of worms, or a Gordian Knot; take your pick. And the Christians in both countries are being annihilated by EVERYBODY. We own a big part of that mess in both countries.

    Bombs and bullets won't kill an ideology.
    If the U.S. Congress was put in charge of the Sahara Desert, there would be a shortage of sand in under six months.



  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,930 Senior Member
    Snake, I wish we could have had this discussion Saturday

    I'm not going to try to remember what is open source and what is not. I will just tell you we have had this capability for a long time. This was a successful test of missile defense that involved a hit to kill vehicle (kinetic kill), similar to what we do in other missile defense systems we use. The US is not the only country that has a missile defense system.

    We can't leverage ultimatums. Especially when Russia is on the opposing side of the board. The last time that happened, WWI started. I'm not saying WWIII will start over it, but I know it will not be pretty. You have to think about this asymmetrically, especially when thinking about Iran, N.K., and others that may leverage unconventional means. Like, if I know I can't get my single ballistic missile through a pacific missile defense grid, then I place my bomb on a 747 and make it the missile. How easy is it to spoof an IFF squawk. Or, just come off of radar once you get past Hawaii and aim for LA. Then you have Russia and China. Do we have enough intercept vehicles to stop each missile they may launch. Remember it was the Russians who believed "Quantity has a Quality of its own". And lets not think about what would happen if they jammed our GPS as they launched.

    As we move forward into the 21st Century, we have to understand that we can accomplish just as much through non-traditional domains of battle. In years past we have only saw domains as Land, Sea, and Air. But as we go forward we have to understand that Space, Cyber, and economics offer other domains to conduct operations through. If you think about it, some of the more important changes in regime happened through the manipulation of economics. We just have to be careful with it since the world's economy is tied together.

    And back to Syria, can we identify why Assaad is bad? Yes he has come off the rails since his country has come apart at the seams,but can you recall anything he did before that? Can you say that he has done anything different than what the North did to the South in the Civil war, except on modern terms. Sherman's march to Atlanta was a "salt the Earth" campaign that targeted civilian farms and plantations. I know that is a little bit of a poor comparison, but look at his actions independent of what the media has told you. Should he have used chemical weapons strikes against rebels in civilian centers...no, but what choices do you have left when you are trying to hold your country together and a World Power (the US) is funding and supporting the rebels you are fighting. Obama chose to support radical rebels over an established and legitimate government trying to prevent another "Arab Spring" uprising. If Obama would have went in together with Russia to help Assaad, we could have forced changes through leveraged support.

    You make a pretty good argument. But I do feel way better knowing we can shoot down NKs, and Iran's when they get them, missiles. Also, I have heard all the dirty stories about Assaad in the past. I always thought Kadaffi was a scumbag that needed to die, until he was killed by his own countrymen and now Libya is going crazy. But I still won't condone Assad's use of chemical weapons on his very own people. He ain't no Sunday School Teacher.

    You're military and probably know volumes more than most here about what's going on with foreign policy. But I look back on the cold war days when we were afraid to fart on the Soviets, but as it turned out we were ahead technologically most of the time. And when we weren't we had them thinking we were. Reagan's Star Wars program had em crapping in their boots. We made them spend themselves into bankruptsy trying to keep up with us. We won the Cold War. I feel we have a lot going for us now and we need to screw world opinion and take advantage where we can. We run around trying to appear honorable on the world stage and none of our enemies give a crap about honorable.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,428 Senior Member
    If we really wanted some of these tinpot dictators out of circulation, we could just give the Mossad a few truckloads of money and a hit list. Then just sit back and enjoy the "Plausible Deniability"- - - - - -"We dindoonuffin' wrong!"
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • 6EQUJ5 - WOW!6EQUJ5 - WOW! Banned Posts: 482 Member
    snake284 wrote: »
    You make a pretty good argument. But I do feel way better knowing we can shoot down NKs, and Iran's when they get them, missiles. Also, I have heard all the dirty stories about Assaad in the past. I always thought Kadaffi was a scumbag that needed to die, until he was killed by his own countrymen and now Libya is going crazy. But I still won't condone Assad's use of chemical weapons on his very own people. He ain't no Sunday School Teacher.

    You're military and probably know volumes more than most here about what's going on with foreign policy. But I look back on the cold war days when we were afraid to fart on the Soviets, but as it turned out we were ahead technologically most of the time. And when we weren't we had them thinking we were. Reagan's Star Wars program had em crapping in their boots. We made them spend themselves into bankruptsy trying to keep up with us. We won the Cold War. I feel we have a lot going for us now and we need to screw world opinion and take advantage where we can. We run around trying to appear honorable on the world stage and none of our enemies give a crap about honorable.

    I agree. It's time we take this piss ant out. If we wait, then quite possibly, in another 10-20 years, demographics could change making a laughable dictator into a serious menace. Sadly, and as well as historically, we as a nation tend to wait until the last minute before getting involved which ends up costing more lives than necessary had we just eliminated the threat in the first place.
  • knitepoetknitepoet Senior Member Posts: 19,018 Senior Member
    I had this discussion Saturday, and both parties agreed that if NK continues, "bowl cut" will probably end up deceased from some rare disease or freak accident. And most likely we'll be able to say with completely honesty "We dindoonuffin' "

    They're putting a large part of China's economy at risk, I seriously doubt they'll let it get to the point of damaging their economy.
    Seven Habits of Highly Effective Pirates, Rule #37: There is no “overkill”. There is only “open fire” and “I need to reload”.


  • 6EQUJ5 - WOW!6EQUJ5 - WOW! Banned Posts: 482 Member



    And back to Syria, can we identify why Assaad is bad? Yes he has come off the rails since his country has come apart at the seams,but can you recall anything he did before that?

    There's a wee bit of difference between being nuke capable and NOT being nuke capable.
  • centermass556centermass556 Senior Member Posts: 3,509 Senior Member
    Assad was the Marshal Tito of the Levant/Arab league, and if there is one thing we learned in the past 30 years is that as much as you don't like it, you need a Marshal Tito sometimes to keep the hoodlums in order. He is a known quantity. As I said, yeah he went over the line with chemical weapons. But have you seen how a possum fights when put into a corner? I'm not justifying the use, I am explaining why he used them. The Previous Administration help put him in a corner and then we complained when he used what ever he could get his hands to fight his way out.

    To the soviets, go back and read all of Reagan's declassified NSDDs. If I remember right, 32 is the key one. You will find that Reagan understood it. Probably one of the few presidents that did. The Oliver North case, Noriega, Afghan involvement, Iran, etc was all tied together. Reagan set out to influence every decision the Moscow made politically, economically, and socially. And he did.
    However in the last 8 years, the soviets have got smart. They are years ahead of us in several categories, one of them is space and space exploitation.

    We have had the ability to intercept missiles for years. We just haven't had the ability to make reliable kinetic missile kills until recently.

    I don't want to sound condescending, but I think sometimes we are lead where the media wants us to be lead. Iran and NK most likely have the ability to secure a nuclear weapon as I type this. However, Pakistan already has nuclear weapons that are multi platform. Meaning, they can deliver them by land, sea, and air. This is the same country that harbored OBL behind our backs. That tells you the level of instability in that country. Why are we not worried about them? I worry more about them than I do ISIS.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    "To have really lived, you must have almost died. To those who have fought for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know."
  • earlyearly Senior Member Posts: 4,950 Senior Member
    It's always seemed like a carnival shell game to me. I'm not as articulate or well informed as Centermass, but I can smell a con.
    My thoughts are generally clear. My typing, not so much.
  • 6EQUJ5 - WOW!6EQUJ5 - WOW! Banned Posts: 482 Member
    Assad was the Marshal Tito of the Levant/Arab league, and if there is one thing we learned in the past 30 years is that as much as you don't like it, you need a Marshal Tito sometimes to keep the hoodlums in order. He is a known quantity. As I said, yeah he went over the line with chemical weapons. But have you seen how a possum fights when put into a corner? I'm not justifying the use, I am explaining why he used them. The Previous Administration help put him in a corner and then we complained when he used what ever he could get his hands to fight his way out.

    To the soviets, go back and read all of Reagan's declassified NSDDs. If I remember right, 32 is the key one. You will find that Reagan understood it. Probably one of the few presidents that did. The Oliver North case, Noriega, Afghan involvement, Iran, etc was all tied together. Reagan set out to influence every decision the Moscow made politically, economically, and socially. And he did.
    However in the last 8 years, the soviets have got smart. They are years ahead of us in several categories, one of them is space and space exploitation.

    We have had the ability to intercept missiles for years. We just haven't had the ability to make reliable kinetic missile kills until recently.

    I don't want to sound condescending, but I think sometimes we are lead where the media wants us to be lead. Iran and NK most likely have the ability to secure a nuclear weapon as I type this. However, Pakistan already has nuclear weapons that are multi platform. Meaning, they can deliver them by land, sea, and air. This is the same country that harbored OBL behind our backs. That tells you the level of instability in that country. Why are we not worried about them? I worry more about them than I do ISIS.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Appreciate your comment, however, I stand with Snake on this one. The entire reason we're in this mess with nukes, the Middle East etc, is because we as a nation refuse to do anything about it until it's too late. Times have changed since the classic "good ol' days" of warfare where tanks lined up on a hill smashing each other to bits or two battleships lobbing shells at each other miles away. Like the revolutionary period where troops lined up in formation to the beat of a fife and drum corps, doctrines of war ebb and wane. Today's enemy would like nothing better than to send a nuke on a shipping container and send it C.O.D. As for Pakistan, it's just a matter of time until this (and I say with sarcasm) "ally" goes rogue and is taken over by extremist factions and starts a nuclear war with India or even us for that matter. It's just a matter of time until the balloon goes up and when it does it will be because we didn't squash the threat before it happened. I do agree with you on the media manipulating the masses, however, there's no denying the real threats we face today despite what the media tells us. In today's world, a few token airstrikes are supposed to quell our adversaries send them off scurrying off in fear never to do that again - Ha! In today's world people get their panties in a wad when we take out a few civilians or damage a Mosque - my thinking is wipe them all out! It's war. . . wipe them off the face of the map! Reminds me of that silly movie where Kim Jong Il is pissed at 'Hawns Bwitz' and mocks him by saying, "if that doesn't work, we'll send you a letter telling you how angry we are, and if that doesn't work, we'll send another letter telling you how angry we are. . . . Despite the comedy, lot's of truth to that line.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,930 Senior Member
    Appreciate your comment, however, I stand with Snake on this one. The entire reason we're in this mess with nukes, the Middle East etc, is because we as a nation refuse to do anything about it until it's too late. Times have changed since the classic "good ol' days" of warfare where tanks lined up on a hill smashing each other to bits or two battleships lobbing shells at each other miles away. Like the revolutionary period where troops lined up in formation to the beat of a fife and drum corps, doctrines of war ebb and wane. Today's enemy would like nothing better than to send a nuke on a shipping container and send it C.O.D. As for Pakistan, it's just a matter of time until this (and I say with sarcasm) "ally" goes rogue and is taken over by extremist factions and starts a nuclear war with India or even us for that matter. It's just a matter of time until the balloon goes up and when it does it will be because we didn't squash the threat before it happened. I do agree with you on the media manipulating the masses, however, there's no denying the real threats we face today despite what the media tells us. In today's world, a few token airstrikes are supposed to quell our adversaries send them off scurrying off in fear never to do that again - Ha! In today's world people get their panties in a wad when we take out a few civilians or damage a Mosque - my thinking is wipe them all out! It's war. . . wipe them off the face of the map! Reminds me of that silly movie where Kim Jong Il is pissed at 'Hawns Bwitz' and mocks him by saying, "if that doesn't work, we'll send you a letter telling you how angry we are, and if that doesn't work, we'll send another letter telling you how angry we are. . . . Despite the comedy, lot's of truth to that line.

    :that:

    Centermass, We just are opposite in our beliefs about this. I don't believe in a bunch of diplomacy because the bad guys keep doing what they're doing while we think we're negotiating. It never works. We never take advantage of the situation until a little problem becomes a HUGE Problem. I say tell them what we don't like that they're doing. If they persist give them warning. If they still ignore us or try to BS us, do what we have to do to fix the problem because talking isn't working. End of Story
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,788 Senior Member
    knitepoet wrote: »
    I had this discussion Saturday, and both parties agreed that if NK continues, "bowl cut" will probably end up deceased from some rare disease or freak accident. And most likely we'll be able to say with completely honesty "We dindoonuffin' "

    They're putting a large part of China's economy at risk, I seriously doubt they'll let it get to the point of damaging their economy.

    NK is China's rabid dog. It is their responsibility to take it out back and quietly end this. One thing I have supported Trump on is his efforts to put pressure on China to do exactly this.
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,788 Senior Member

    I don't want to sound condescending, but I think sometimes we are lead where the media wants us to be lead. Iran and NK most likely have the ability to secure a nuclear weapon as I type this. However, Pakistan already has nuclear weapons that are multi platform. Meaning, they can deliver them by land, sea, and air. This is the same country that harbored OBL behind our backs. That tells you the level of instability in that country. Why are we not worried about them? I worry more about them than I do ISIS.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    We need boogie men. How else can we justify in a spending so much of our GDP on defense and security programs? If there were no more bad guys to be scared of all that spending would be much harder to justify. In many ways our military spending is the largest "make work" program since the Works Progress Administration. It provides jobs and education to young people from places with few other opportunities. It funds research and development that frequently spills over into other areas of our economy. It funds hundreds of thousands of high paying jobs at the hundreds of defense contractors all over the country. All of these things are largely positive. Sure they could probably be provided in other ways, potentially cheaper and more efficiently, but we also get to maintain the pride of having the world's most advanced and powerful military and on occasion we have the ability to use that to our advantage in international relations.
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 26,188 Senior Member
    Regarding antimissile missiles, I became aware of this weapon when I had been in the Navy about a year. My ship was equipped with such a weapons system, the Terrier two stage SAM. Here's how that system worked in ancient times. When it was known that a missile with nuclear warhead was launched at the fleet the fire control radar was locked onto the incoming missile. A Terrier missile with 15 kiloton nuclear warhead would be run out on the launch rail and fired at the incoming missile. With a 15 kiloton warhead it's like hand grenades and horseshoes; close is good enough. And the Terrier missile system could hit a target at 40 nautical miles that was only the size of a 5 foot long target drone. We're better now than then.

    IF we know it's coming, then we can take it out with the newer, longer range, more accurate nuclear tipped SAMs in our current inventory, and at a range that is safe for the bedwetters to have no fear of the nuclear fallout. And if it's a ICBM warhead then it can be taken out at high altitude reentry point where the explosion of the SAM nuke warhead will cause no great permanent harm.

    The recent test was done with conventional explosive warhead..............for FREAKIN' OBVIOUS REASONS! :tooth:

    None of this is secret, BTW; you just have to know a little bit about it, and where to look to find the good bits. ;)
    If the U.S. Congress was put in charge of the Sahara Desert, there would be a shortage of sand in under six months.



Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.