Slashdot Mirror
Missile Defense Test Intercepts ICBM Target, Says Pentagon (cnbc.com)
schwit1 quotes CNBC:
In the first test of its kind, the Pentagon on Monday carried out a "salvo" intercept of an unarmed missile soaring over the Pacific, using two interceptor missiles launched from underground silos in southern California.
Both interceptors zeroed in on the target -- a re-entry vehicle that had been launched 4,000 miles away atop an intercontinental-range missile, the Pentagon said. The first interceptor hit and destroyed the re-entry vehicle, which in an actual attack would contain a warhead. The second interceptor hit a secondary object, as expected, according to a statement by the Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency.
Both interceptors zeroed in on the target -- a re-entry vehicle that had been launched 4,000 miles away atop an intercontinental-range missile, the Pentagon said. The first interceptor hit and destroyed the re-entry vehicle, which in an actual attack would contain a warhead. The second interceptor hit a secondary object, as expected, according to a statement by the Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency.
In terms of actual military technology this is nothing new. The announcement makes it sound like they independently tracked a missle launched from an unknown base, found it in the air and launched an intercept that succeeded. Instead, this test is just another in the "yep, when we know exactly where things start from, exactly how fast they are going, and position our counter at exactly the right distance away, we can hit the dummy". The US is adopting the old Soviet style of exaggerating military achievements and filling gaps with braggadocio.
One can add to these two "objections" to the Iron Dome system a third, minor quibble: It is costly in terms of dollars as well. Each Iron Dome battery costs about $100 million; Israel currently has nine batteries.
And each Iron Dome Tamir missile that Israel fires — and usually two are sent up to intercept each descending rocket — costs at least $50,000.
Each rocket Hamas fires costs $500 to $1,000 to produce. Hamas had 9,000 rockets at its disposal at the start of the recent conflict. Hezbollah reportedly has 100,000 rockets, including long-range Scuds. Do the math. How Israel might cope economically, not to mention militarily, with such a rocket deluge in a future clash is a very real problem.
- Los Angeles Times
We don't need terrorists to bring down our planes. They can just bankrupt us.
Arguably, that was a solved problem between rational nation states. Mutually Assured Destruction kept us safe for 40 years during the Cold War. Either side could rain a salvo of missiles on the other, but neither did because they feared likewise retaliation.
A missile defense technology is really only effective against a rogue attacker who is crazy enough not to care about retaliation. e.g. North Korea flinging a missile at the U.S. west coast. And the bigger issue moving forward will be a small terrorist organization or a nation state sneaking in a nuke via a suitcase or car, and detonating it. Uncertainty over who exactly perpetrated the attack prevents retaliation, making it the perfect means for a weaker power to attack a stronger one. Missile defense doesn't protect you from that.