Slashdot Mirror
US Missle Interceptor Tests a Success
An anonymous reader writes to mention that the U.S. Missile Defense Agency and Lockheed Martin recently reported success in the test flight of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile system. "THAAD is designed to defend U.S. troops, allied forces, population centers and critical infrastructure against short- to intermediate range ballistic missiles. THAAD comprises a fire control and communications system, interceptors, launchers and a radar. The THAAD interceptor uses hit-to-kill technology to destroy targets, and is the only weapon system that engages threat ballistic missiles at both endo- and exo-atmospheric altitudes."
At first, I was thinking "Great, now all we can defend ourselves against all of those ICBMs that Al-Queda has laying around". But then I realized that there are countries that don't have the luxury of having a few thousand miles of ocean between them and their enemies. I think this technology would be great if deployed to South Korea, Japan, Tiawan, or Isreal. Nothing says "Screw you, Kim" like a system to completely nullify the technology that he's spent years and an equivalent of about his entire country's GDP to develop. Or a note from the IDF to hezbollah: "Can you please stop shooting missiles at us? I'm getting tired of re-loading the launcher".
Now the question is whether this will just be a defense against missile threats from rogue states
The system works on short and intermediate range missiles - the kind presumably launched from submarines.
The arms race isn't new - it's an ongoing thing if you have an army. The only option is to do away with it to get out of the race. But if you're a large nation with many useful resources - stuff other people might want - you're stuck in the race.
Still the danger here is if you (temporarily) have a way to avoid taking damage from an enemy, that makes it MORE likely that you will strike with less hesitation. Frankly I look forward to the day that this technology can be defeated. A little fear and hesitation is good for foreign policy once in a while. It begets respect.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
whether or not the system can defend against the recently developed random-trajectory missile developed by Russia.
No, this is convincingly aimed at the rogue states (with 1-2 missiles), and not at, say Russia or China.
That's because the system is nearly impossible to scale up or upgrade effectively, and it is very vulnerable to countermeasures.
Therefore, there's simply no reason for the arms race.
Obama likes poor people so much, he wants to make more of them.
There are multiple stages in the flight of a ballistic missile for which you can target it. The layered system the US is working towards designing and implementing aims to cover launch, boost, orbit, and re-entry phases of flight.
That's done too. Iraqi Army, which used to threaten our aircraft patrolling North (Kurds) and South (Shia) of the country, is disbanded. The threat to our allies in the region (Kuwait, Israel, Saudi Arabia) is gone too, thank you very much...
Iran now has 100+K American troops next to it, which is good if we want to contain it. USSR (so contained earlier) is gone — America's decades-long presence in Western Europe accomplished its purpose. Now it is Middle East's turn...
Only if "your head" is somewhere in Najaf's orchards plotting to kill prominent Iraqis or US soldiers...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Why? They have their uses and are not that inhumane — supposedly, the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear bombings have taken less lives, than the weeks of conventional bombings before them (something like 150K lives per night is allegedly attributable to the latter).
And they ended the war, possibly several months earlier...
Today, for another example, using "tactical" nukes to bust Iran's nuclear-research bunkers would, likely, be quite efficient and kill fewer people than any alternative... It would, of course, be a political barrel of worms with anti-Americans world wide screaming their heads off (I wish they did!), but in cold blooded objectivity, it would be rather beneficial for all concerned, including Iranians (tough love and all).
Arms race is just a part of the general race (technological, cultural, scientific). There is nothing particularly immoral about it. Killing people sucks (and is often immoral), but it sucks even more to be killed — or seeing someone dear being killed...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
not if you are from palestine
Bull. Palestinians have been on the Knesset (whereas the PLO didn't even have an elected body until after Arafat died.)
Also, the Palis had trade and stores, etc. until the homicidal amongst them got them removed from most of Israeli society.
But Palis could vote and own land. In fact, until Iraq the only place Arabs had ever been democratically elected in the Middle East was in Israel.
The opposite of progress is congress