Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The Czechs are happy about this.
The U.S. and Russians have been playing chess over the missile shield. Warsaw and Prague were just squares on the chessboard.
Still, with nearly 60% of Czechs, according to some recent local polls, opposed to hosting a radar facility for the U.S. missile shield, the decision to scrap it will go down well.
The most common concern among locals who oppose the radar is that the U.S. Army facility intensifies the security risks faced by the Czech Republic. “Terrorists may actually want to attack the Czech Republic because it would host the radar base,” said one protester at one of the recent anti-radar demonstration.
Others argue the radar is based on an untested and unproven technology.
The smallest and least vocal group of Czech radar opponents argued that the radar would in the long-run destabilize the allegedly fragile Russian government of Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.
“What if some real lunatic rules in Russia in the near future?” an acquaintance of mine once told me. “I’m against the radar because it may stir up a nasty nationalistic backlash in Russia.”
The View From Prague: Goodbye and Good Riddance - New Europe - WSJ
... Fourthly, Russia is a scary place with some ruthless sons of bitches in control - well, one in particular - Putin. However, they are in deep economical troubles and will be for a long time to come. I do not see any immediate or short-term danger coming from that part of the world. They've actually been very cooperative when it comes to the issue of Iran and a few others. What Russia now wants is mainly respect and that is what Obama is giving them. I don't see anything wrong with that.
The Cold War is over, Russia is not about to paint the White House red, climb out of your shelters and try to be a little - tiny little bit - Christian.
When it comes to Iran, I believe US has enough offensive power in place to bomb the crap out of that place whenever they want already. Everything else is up to diplomacy. So, let's try it on for a size.
I am glad we are no longer wasting money defending Poland from Iran.
We spend more money on defense than the rest of the world combined.
It's one of the main reasons we are going broke.
The radar of this system would provide no intelligence on Russia that we don't already have. It's an irrelevant whine from the Russians.A spokeswoman at the Polish Ministry of Defense also said the program had been suspended.
"This is catastrophic for Poland," said the spokeswoman
U.S. scraps missile defense shield plans - CNN.com
Yes, the current polish government justs LUVS this!
Not.
Current Polish government, if it doesn't follow the desires of its people that elected it into power can kiss my ass.
The 'dismay' that's been described in all of those articles only refers to CZ and Poland - and - only quotes pro-radar politicians. Even though it's not reported, believe it or not, there are many who are jubilant over Obama's decision.
A spokeswoman at the Polish Ministry of Defense also said the program had been suspended.
"This is catastrophic for Poland," said the spokeswoman
U.S. scraps missile defense shield plans - CNN.com
Yes, the current polish government justs LUVS this!
Not.
Current Polish government, if it doesn't follow the desires of its people that elected it into power can kiss my ass.
The 'dismay' that's been described in all of those articles only refers to CZ and Poland - and - only quotes pro-radar politicians. Even though it's not reported, believe it or not, there are many who are jubilant over Obama's decision.
I would be one thing if the missile defense system actually worked. Then we could have a sane and possibly fruitful debate. But considering it doesn't work, what's the point?
I would be one thing if the missile defense system actually worked. Then we could have a sane and possibly fruitful debate. But considering it doesn't work, what's the point?
It does work.
I would be one thing if the missile defense system actually worked. Then we could have a sane and possibly fruitful debate. But considering it doesn't work, what's the point?
It does work.
K. http://www.mda.mil/mdalink/pdf/testrecord.pdfI would be one thing if the missile defense system actually worked. Then we could have a sane and possibly fruitful debate. But considering it doesn't work, what's the point?
It does work.
I want one link from each of you
[Emphasis added]....
Ballistic Missile Defense Flight Test Record
(as of July 31, 2009)
The Missile Defense Agency conducts regular flight tests to verify performance and
confirm the technological progress of the Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS).
Testing to date has given us confidence in the basic design, effectiveness, and
operational capability for short, medium and long-range ballistic missile defense.
Overall Test Record:
Across all programs, 40 of 51 Hit-to-Kill intercept attempts have been
successful since 2001
16 of 19 Hit-to-Kill intercepts have been successful since 2007
Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense: 19 of 23 intercept attempts (including Operation
Burnt Frost in Feb. 2008), 4 failures since tests began in 2002 (8 of 10 in tests
involving the operationally configured interceptor)
Includes two Standard Missile-2 (SM-2) blast fragmentation, non hit-to-kill
intercepts using a proximity-fuzed explosive to destroy target
Causes of Failures:
-FM-5 Interceptor divert control malfunctioned
-FTM-11 Fire-control malfunctioned because of operator error
-Pacific Blitz exercise One target was intercepted, another was missed; all
interceptors were version Block I missiles that had exceeded their service life
-JFTM-2 Interceptor flew normally until final seconds; cause not yet
determined
Ground-based Midcourse Defense: 8 of 13 intercept attempts, 1 no-test
since tests began in 1999 (3 of 3 tests involving the operationally configured
interceptor) Causes of Failures:
-IFT-4 Kill vehicles infrared sensor cooling malfunctioned--the only
malfunction thus far in final endgame period before intercept
-IFT-5 Kill vehicle and booster did not separate
-IFT-10 Kill vehicle and booster did not separate
-IFT-13c Interceptor failed to launch due to problematic software
configuration
-IFT-14 Interceptor failed to launch after a silo support arm did not retract,
triggering an automatic abort
FTG-03 was a no test because the target malfunctioned after launch;
interceptor was not launched)
Terminal High Altitude Area Defense: 6 of 6 intercept attempts, 2 no-tests
(all tests involve the operationally configured interceptor)
Current test program began in 2006
No-tests: FTT-04 and FTT-10 had targets malfunction after launch
A spokeswoman at the Polish Ministry of Defense also said the program had been suspended.
"This is catastrophic for Poland," said the spokeswoman
U.S. scraps missile defense shield plans - CNN.com
Yes, the current polish government justs LUVS this!
Not.
Current Polish government, if it doesn't follow the desires of its people that elected it into power can kiss my ass.
The 'dismay' that's been described in all of those articles only refers to CZ and Poland - and - only quotes pro-radar politicians. Even though it's not reported, believe it or not, there are many who are jubilant over Obama's decision.
Ahh yes... Jubillation indeed! Much as it was Mr. Chamberlain, when you returned from Nazi Germany and declared "PEACE" in THAT time... You may recall, that, THAT time was just months prior to Germany invading the whole of Poland...rather openly demonstrating the folly of negotiating with Leftists; which was around the time when jubilation erupted in Germany... jubilation resulting from Germany FINALLY getting the respect it had so long been denied; after their prolonged period of 'economical' depression... and at a time when Germany was determined to return to it's "SUPER-POWER" status.
And all because YOU HELPED!
Do you recall how that worked out for you Mr. Chamberlain? Here's a tip... (not good... incomprehensible catastrophe... err... uhh... "BAD... Really, REALLY BAD!")
But hey... The world cheered you for a moment and that moment was truly a GREAT DAY FOR DIPLOMACY! Right up until it proved that Diplomacy was only possible where all the players are interested in compromise.
What's most interesting to me, is how obvious that point is to non-idiots and yet a person as bright as you clearly feel that you are... can't seem to recognize it.
I wonder what that means...
K. http://www.mda.mil/mdalink/pdf/testrecord.pdf[Emphasis added]....
Ballistic Missile Defense Flight Test Record
(as of July 31, 2009)
The Missile Defense Agency conducts regular flight tests to verify performance and
confirm the technological progress of the Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS).
Testing to date has given us confidence in the basic design, effectiveness, and
operational capability for short, medium and long-range ballistic missile defense.
Overall Test Record:
Across all programs, 40 of 51 Hit-to-Kill intercept attempts have been
successful since 2001
16 of 19 Hit-to-Kill intercepts have been successful since 2007
Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense: 19 of 23 intercept attempts (including Operation
Burnt Frost in Feb. 2008), 4 failures since tests began in 2002 (8 of 10 in tests
involving the operationally configured interceptor)
Includes two Standard Missile-2 (SM-2) blast fragmentation, non hit-to-kill
intercepts using a proximity-fuzed explosive to destroy target
Causes of Failures:
-FM-5 Interceptor divert control malfunctioned
-FTM-11 Fire-control malfunctioned because of operator error
-Pacific Blitz exercise One target was intercepted, another was missed; all
interceptors were version Block I missiles that had exceeded their service life
-JFTM-2 Interceptor flew normally until final seconds; cause not yet
determined
Ground-based Midcourse Defense: 8 of 13 intercept attempts, 1 no-test
since tests began in 1999 (3 of 3 tests involving the operationally configured
interceptor) Causes of Failures:
-IFT-4 Kill vehicles infrared sensor cooling malfunctioned--the only
malfunction thus far in final endgame period before intercept
-IFT-5 Kill vehicle and booster did not separate
-IFT-10 Kill vehicle and booster did not separate
-IFT-13c Interceptor failed to launch due to problematic software
configuration
-IFT-14 Interceptor failed to launch after a silo support arm did not retract,
triggering an automatic abort
FTG-03 was a no test because the target malfunctioned after launch;
interceptor was not launched)
Terminal High Altitude Area Defense: 6 of 6 intercept attempts, 2 no-tests
(all tests involve the operationally configured interceptor)
Current test program began in 2006
No-tests: FTT-04 and FTT-10 had targets malfunction after launch
Room for improvement compared to typical kill rates, but claims that it does not work are inaccurate.
Me too. I usually provide links to support claims I make so I apologize that you had to ask.K. http://www.mda.mil/mdalink/pdf/testrecord.pdfI want one link from each of you[Emphasis added]....
Ballistic Missile Defense Flight Test Record
(as of July 31, 2009)
The Missile Defense Agency conducts regular flight tests to verify performance and
confirm the technological progress of the Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS).
Testing to date has given us confidence in the basic design, effectiveness, and
operational capability for short, medium and long-range ballistic missile defense.
Overall Test Record:
Across all programs, 40 of 51 Hit-to-Kill intercept attempts have been
successful since 2001
16 of 19 Hit-to-Kill intercepts have been successful since 2007
Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense: 19 of 23 intercept attempts (including Operation
Burnt Frost in Feb. 2008), 4 failures since tests began in 2002 (8 of 10 in tests
involving the operationally configured interceptor)
Includes two Standard Missile-2 (SM-2) blast fragmentation, non hit-to-kill
intercepts using a proximity-fuzed explosive to destroy target
Causes of Failures:
-FM-5 Interceptor divert control malfunctioned
-FTM-11 Fire-control malfunctioned because of operator error
-Pacific Blitz exercise One target was intercepted, another was missed; all
interceptors were version Block I missiles that had exceeded their service life
-JFTM-2 Interceptor flew normally until final seconds; cause not yet
determined
Ground-based Midcourse Defense: 8 of 13 intercept attempts, 1 no-test
since tests began in 1999 (3 of 3 tests involving the operationally configured
interceptor) Causes of Failures:
-IFT-4 Kill vehicles infrared sensor cooling malfunctioned--the only
malfunction thus far in final endgame period before intercept
-IFT-5 Kill vehicle and booster did not separate
-IFT-10 Kill vehicle and booster did not separate
-IFT-13c Interceptor failed to launch due to problematic software
configuration
-IFT-14 Interceptor failed to launch after a silo support arm did not retract,
triggering an automatic abort
FTG-03 was a no test because the target malfunctioned after launch;
interceptor was not launched)
Terminal High Altitude Area Defense: 6 of 6 intercept attempts, 2 no-tests
(all tests involve the operationally configured interceptor)
Current test program began in 2006
No-tests: FTT-04 and FTT-10 had targets malfunction after launch
Room for improvement compared to typical kill rates, but claims that it does not work are inaccurate.
Thanks SiModo....now we are just awaiting a link from the other side of the argument.
Will it work?
The theory is that the interceptor missile homes in on and destroys its target in the air by physically hitting the incoming warhead.
However, the closing speed of interceptor and target will be 24,000kph (14,900mph), or 6.5km (4 miles) per second - so the task is more difficult than hitting a bullet with another bullet.
The system's supporters say that not only does it work, but it is even more accurate than that.
But critics say that, despite having spent over $100bn (£54bn), the Pentagon still has not proved the system can work in realistic conditions.
Independent scientific bodies in the US have said that tests of the system's intercept capabilities have been highly scripted, with the defence being given detailed information about the attack beforehand.
They also argue that the defence system could be easily circumvented by potential attackers.
And that's the entire point of having a multilayered ballistic missile defense - if one layer is circumvented, there are others to fall back on. We should not scrap any layer.Even though I really do not want to enter the whole - does the system work - debate, I found this quote from a BBC article interesting.
BBC NEWS | Europe | Q&A: US missile defence
Will it work?
The theory is that the interceptor missile homes in on and destroys its target in the air by physically hitting the incoming warhead.
However, the closing speed of interceptor and target will be 24,000kph (14,900mph), or 6.5km (4 miles) per second - so the task is more difficult than hitting a bullet with another bullet.
The system's supporters say that not only does it work, but it is even more accurate than that.
But critics say that, despite having spent over $100bn (£54bn), the Pentagon still has not proved the system can work in realistic conditions.
Independent scientific bodies in the US have said that tests of the system's intercept capabilities have been highly scripted, with the defence being given detailed information about the attack beforehand.
They also argue that the defence system could be easily circumvented by potential attackers.
You stated, "It doesn't work, so what's the point?". This does not support your statement at all.US missile system's track record: test delays, failed launches, missed targets | World news | The Guardian
From the Article:
"The planned European missile defence system would have essentially no capability to defend against a real missile attack.
Like I said, the ONLY time it's successful is if the coordinates of the target are fed into the system first and if the day is nice and if no geese are flying around, then the success rate is barely above 50%.
You know, this info is freely available. If anyone really wants to know, it's easy to go look it up from a hundred reputable sites. And remember, it's scientists who are reporting this. They are the ones that have to be convinced, because they follow where the data leads. Republicans just make crap up.
