Slashdot Mirror
Interceptor Missile Fails Test Launch
jangobongo writes "The US missile defense system suffered a serious setback today, just 2 weeks before it was scheduled to be activated. A target ICBM was launched from Alaska, but crashed harmlessly into the ocean as the interceptor missile based on an atoll in the Pacific Ocean shut itself down due to an unknown "anomaly". The cause of the failure could have been anything from a software glitch to a major hardware malfunction."
And the United States wonders why we're [Canada] reluctant to join the missile defence programme...
It doesn't work, that is why.
Personally, I hope the defense project fails... otherwise Canada will be forced to disagree again with American policy. I'm sure there'll be economic consequences.
Well, this has been the US's wet dream for a long time. If we're able to shoot down other people's nukes we get to own the world and all that. Also, this isn't nearly the first time we've failed miserably at it.
We're shouldn't be talking about how much money has been poured into this thing this year, we should be talking about how much has been poured into it since at least the 80s, and probably before that.
On an aside, here at MIT a Professor Postol gave a very convincing lecture a year or two ago on the fraud surrounding the first National Missile Defence test, and the subsequent cover-up of the allegations by MIT's Lincoln Labs and others. Needless to say, he's received a lot of "pressure" from all over the place. More info here.
Huh? so what exactly did the wire reporters get wrong? I am especially eager to know since they are quoting a statement from the Defense Department's Missile Defense Agency.
I guess now any barely coherent rant on how the so called "liberal media" don't know anything is bound to be marked "informative".
The chief weapons tester doesn't even have confidence in the system.
I don't see how this system will ever work unless our attacker warns us in advance of the missile's launch time, its location, flight trajectory,....etc. What a waste of taxpayer money. People should be outraged.
No, we used only PGMs in the Iraqi conurbations. We never "bombed the cities." We used regular, unguided munitions dropped from B-52s to destroy the terrorist camps northeast of Baghdad, but those were dozens of miles away from any built-up areas....
Its interesting that you use the term "terrorist". In the context of Iraq, these are people who believe the Americans have no business being there and want to get them out. How does that make them terrorists ? If the russians invaded america if you fought back would that qualify you to be a "terrorist" ? Jeez!
Typical wrong-headed thinking. We go invading other countries to prevent problems at home. During the 1990s we failed to invade Sudan, choosing instead to fire cruise missiles...
We failed to invade Sudan, we invaded Afghanisan, we invaded Iraq, we invaded so and so.... Wow. Who the flying fuck gives America the right to invade whoever it pleases the world over ? Is it just me or have you noticed that it seems to be the only country large scale invading the ass out of the world ? Dont give me that bullcrap about "to prevent problems at home". Iraq had no means of doing the US any harm. All the charges against it were trumped up right down to the laughable WMD threat. The world over people knew that was horseshit and thats why any self respecting country (which wont get squeezed by the US) in the UN told you to fuck off! France got noticed only because it had veto and gave enough of a shit to say something about it...
What happened? September 11 happened. It became --you see where I'm going here? --a problem at home....
You're thinking is laughably simple. What did Sept 11th involve ? Aircraft and a bunch of seriously pissed off fanatics. Period. If you invade every country out there you will multiply the pissed off fanatics five times over. Wiping out "terrorists" in Iraq will only fuel more violence. America has a rich diversity of people and the more countries you invade the larger percentage of you're local populace you're going to have pissed off at you. Yeah thats solving problems at home...sure! --you see where I'm going here ? --mayhem at home! Militancy never solved anything unless it was absolutely necessary.
Typical of right-wingers with an agenda instead of a cause.
You see the Agenda we can't stand is the smoke & mirrors of these projects. You know the smoke that a missile defense "shield" will make us stronger/"safer" and the mirror that the failure of the program that Bush wants isn't Bush's fault. Take a vote, and I bet the public would drop this for the pork project it is.
If this were a cause, it would be an international & consorted effort of defense of democracies against known enemies and terrorist groups. Instead it's an agenda to line the pockets of specific groups and agenda makers.
Instead we're told pork-barrel projects such as Social Security, Medicare, Health-Care and welfare are a huge waste of tax dollars yet ALL of them could have been solvent for our lifetime had we not insisted on these useless "defense" programs and wars.
Scramjet is completely different than missile defense programs and dummy ICBM's being wasted. Scramjet is a technology that could potentially increase our feasibility of cheaper exploration of space and faster transportation. I guess Scramjet falls under that useless "science" category huh?
Remember, It's a democracy and we can voice our opinions just like you. Dissent and questioning government is the only defense and expectation of a true democracy.
If Bush didn't want us to think his policies were useless then its up to that man to turn those views around. I'm tired of the pointless defenses of this man without any sustenance.
If your not a right-winger or a neo-con I must apologize. However as a citizen of this country and someone who is fitting the bill for our government my voice should be heard and democracy doesn't mean the blind leading the blind.