Exoatmospheric Kill Vechicle Test Successful

angio wrote to us with the report about the test of an interceptor missle, in the Marshall Islands, was a success. The system shot down a modified Minuteman missle - for more coverage, check out the original article on the Exoatmospheric Kill Vechicle.

Comments

Missing the point

[MattXVI]

Several posts here have missed the point of this device. It is not intended to intercept a volley of ICBMs. Rather, it could protect a region from (militarily)small countries and rogue states, like China, Iraq and North Korea, that can only afford or hide a few missles. This has nothing at all to do with Russia. They are not a direct threat to the US (right now).

Since so few people read the original article, note also that North Korea has missle technology that can hit Chicago (as well as the entire West Coast).

Also note that this successful test was against a fairly sophisticated Minuteman II ICBM with several decoys around it. The combined velocity at impact was 15,000 mph, or about 6 or 7 kilometers per second.

For a transcript of a military briefing on friday that covered this click here.

Global Shield

[mattdm]

I'd like to see technology like this developed and turned over to the United Nations with a set policy that any nuclear missle originating in any country going to any country will automatically be blocked.

--

missile defense == good, NULL == counter-arguments

[eries]

I was surprised to see so many posts about how we should not proceed with missile defense, because then we will do stupid things because we will feel invulnerable.

This makes no sense. I'll just make a few brief arguments:

1) Mutually assured destruction is a doctrine that only applies in a situation where
(sub-point a) there are a small number of superpowers with nuclear weapons
and (sub-point b) the two superpowers are rational enough not to want MAD

Now, this no longer applies. There are too many "superpowers" (if you insist on counting places like Russia). Worse, there are superpowers that are simply not rational. Take China for instance. Mao was once quoted as saying that he was not afraid of nuclear war. Why? Because China had so many people, nuclear war would only destroy the capitalist superstructure and ensure the victory of the proletariat. Not good.

2) The real threat is not from other "superpowers" but from rogue states and terrorists.

Think about it. Some fundamentalist jihad warrior out there decides that he wants to destroy NYC. Sure, we could threaten to retaliate against his home country or something like that, but in many cases terrorists are increasingly alienated from their westernizing homes. So, this nut case wants to take down NYC, and we are basically powerless to stop him. Think about what the destruction of NYC would mean to the US. Now, since there is simply no way to deterr this kind of behaviour, wouldn't you like at least some way to defend ourselves?

Last point, 3) you don't leave your house unlocked just because you have an alarm system. Further (call it 3a if you want), you don't go around antagonizing gang members just because you have police in your community.