Nuclear Weapons - What it takes to defend against them.

[Mushroom]

true but low level and high speed has its own advantages.

True, but it still was not a stealth aircraft. It relied upon its low level flight characteristics and advanced RADAR to use the terrain to avoid RADAR detection, not anything about the design of the aircraft itself.

 

[Jarlaxle]

You don't know the definition of ABM then. It's specific to ICBMs, there's no evidence that any ABM can successfully intercept an ICBM in any way.

It absolutely can, if done properly. (Nobody has.)

 

[Dayton3]

It absolutely can, if done properly. (Nobody has.)

wikipedia disagrees with you

 

[Jarlaxle]

wikipedia disagrees with you

Oh, the horror. However will I cope.

 

[Dayton3]

Oh, the horror. However will I cope.

Why would you not trust something about a largely technical issue on Wikipedia? You know Wikipedia has often been criticized for how they used to source their material but that time has long since passed.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Why would you not trust something about a largely technical issue on Wikipedia? You know Wikipedia has often been criticized for how they used to source their material but that time has long since passed.

They're wrong.

 

[Dayton3]

They're wrong.

I can bring up numerous examples of successful intercepts of ICBM analogs by U.S built missiles.

No you might then claim that "analogs" are not REAL ICBMs. Of course they aren't. No one launches actual ICBMs in those kinds of tests. Just as we don't shoot real SAMs at our jets in order to test our jet fighters ECM.

 

[Jarlaxle]

I can bring up numerous examples of successful intercepts of ICBM analogs by U.S built missiles.

No you might then claim that "analogs" are not REAL ICBMs. Of course they aren't. No one launches actual ICBMs in those kinds of tests. Just as we don't shoot real SAMs at our jets in order to test our jet fighters ECM.

Did you quote the right post?

 

[Mushroom]

It absolutely can, if done properly. (Nobody has.)

Because by how some define it, it can only be "proven" if actually used against an ICBM carrying a nuke.

This is no longer the 1950's, and nobody goes around launching actual nuclear missiles to do tests on anymore. Therefore in the eyes of many, they will never be "proven to work".

 

[Likkmee]

Solucionez