| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
 Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:45 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Very funny.
That being said the cost of one nuclear missile going down a major city would run up to a trillion dollars. Iran and North Korea are working on missiles that can hit the US. They ought not be allowed to gain any strategic advantage for their efforts.
The US doesn't have it down yet nevertheless just a few years ago Putin said it was impossible to hit a bullet with another bullet and the US has now done it.
It is worth the cost to keep Iran and North Korea from realizing any benefit from their nuclear programs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 3:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm of two minds. Let's say NK has two nuclear missiles. It nukes Seattle. MAD dictates the USA reduces NK to slag. But can it do that? What would be the effect on South Korea, Japan, China, Taiwan, and Russia? The fall out would cripple parts of those economies. I believe the missile shield is in response to this kind of situation. The US, not being a nation of mindless huns, would have to moderate its response. Four major economies the USA relies on would be damaged. Even if the USA would launch such an attack, it may well enter the minds of NK that the USA wouldn't dare nuke it back for the reasons above. MAD only works when it's clear both sides have nothing to lose in a return strike.
Anyway, now NK threatens it will launch a second strike unless... It might put the USA in a nasty situation where it might have to negotiate.
Since MAD is compromised, the USA needs to look for another option to respond to such threats.
On the flipside, if you really wanted to nuke America, you would just sail a nuke into New Yorks harbor on a ship. There's no defense against that. It's pointless to spend billions of dollars when the system can be easily defeated.
One a side note: what happens when rogue states get advanced remote controlled, radar-invisible aircraft. How easy would it be to take out the white house or fly over a presidential photo op and drop some death from above? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spliff
Joined: 19 Jan 2004
Location: Khon Kaen, Thailand
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 3:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
It is worth the cost to keep Iran and North Korea from realizing any benefit from their nuclear programs.
|
Absolutly correct...we should be dealing w/ them both very soon, I hope. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 5:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="mindmetoo"]
| Quote: |
I'm of two minds. Let's say NK has two nuclear missiles. It nukes Seattle. MAD dictates the USA reduces NK to slag. But can it do that? What would be the effect on South Korea, Japan, China, Taiwan, and Russia? The fall out would cripple parts of those economies. I believe the missile shield is in response to this kind of situation. The US, not being a nation of mindless huns, would have to moderate its response. Four major economies the USA relies on would be damaged. Even if the USA would launch such an attack, it may well enter the minds of NK that the USA wouldn't dare nuke it back for the reasons above. MAD only works when it's clear both sides have nothing to lose in a return strike.
Anyway, now NK threatens it will launch a second strike unless... It might put the USA in a nasty situation where it might have to negotiate.
Since MAD is compromised, the USA needs to look for another option to respond to such threats. |
| Quote: |
| On the flipside, if you really wanted to nuke America, you would just sail a nuke into New Yorks harbor on a ship. There's no defense against that. It's pointless to spend billions of dollars when the system can be easily defeated. |
there is a defense against that. submarines th eoast guard and probably a lot of other things . It is not true that there is no defense against that.
It is not something that missile defense covers but it would be easy to defend against that kind of thing.
| Quote: |
| One a side note: what happens when rogue states get advanced remote controlled, radar-invisible aircraft. How easy would it be to take out the white house or fly over a presidential photo op and drop some death from above? |
The day rogue states get that kind of technology is far off and probably the US will have better radar by then. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
I'm of two minds. Let's say NK has two nuclear missiles. It nukes Seattle. MAD dictates the USA reduces NK to slag. But can it do that? What would be the effect on South Korea, Japan, China, Taiwan, and Russia? The fall out would cripple parts of those economies. I believe the missile shield is in response to this kind of situation. The US, not being a nation of mindless huns, would have to moderate its response. Four major economies the USA relies on would be damaged. Even if the USA would launch such an attack, it may well enter the minds of NK that the USA wouldn't dare nuke it back for the reasons above. MAD only works when it's clear both sides have nothing to lose in a return strike.
Anyway, now NK threatens it will launch a second strike unless... It might put the USA in a nasty situation where it might have to negotiate.
Since MAD is compromised, the USA needs to look for another option to respond to such threats.
On the flipside, if you really wanted to nuke America, you would just sail a nuke into New Yorks harbor on a ship. There's no defense against that. It's pointless to spend billions of dollars when the system can be easily defeated.
One a side note: what happens when rogue states get advanced remote controlled, radar-invisible aircraft. How easy would it be to take out the white house or fly over a presidential photo op and drop some death from above? |
Excellent case for disarmament, good relations with neighbors and strong international cooperation on containment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
there is a defense against that. submarines th eoast guard and probably a lot of other things . It is not true that there is no defense against that. |
The coast guard inspects every single ship coming into port? Critics have been saying for a long time the ports are incredibly vulnerable.
| Quote: |
| The day rogue states get that kind of technology is far off and probably the US will have better radar by then. |
Anyone could assemble it tomorrow if they really wanted to. An arab engineering student in the USA could cobble something together. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
| Excellent case for disarmament, good relations with neighbors and strong international cooperation on containment. |
Indeed. When people have jobs to go to, mortgages to pay for, a sense that if they keep their nose to the grind stone they'll always have a job to pay for that mortgage and put food on the table, you don't have time to work up a real hate to pick up a gun and kill your neighbor because of his religion. Why does it seem inconceivable France and Germany will never, ever go to war? We need to work to create that kind of world. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 7:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| The coast guard inspects every single ship coming into port? Critics have been saying for a long time the ports are incredibly vulnerable. |
Ok but defense is possible. agreed?
| Quote: |
| Anyone could assemble it tomorrow if they really wanted to. An arab engineering student in the USA could cobble something together |
Something that evades radar with an explosive device or something more powerful? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 7:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
I'm of two minds. Let's say NK has two nuclear missiles. It nukes Seattle. MAD dictates the USA reduces NK to slag. But can it do that? What would be the effect on South Korea, Japan, China, Taiwan, and Russia? The fall out would cripple parts of those economies. I believe the missile shield is in response to this kind of situation. The US, not being a nation of mindless huns, would have to moderate its response. Four major economies the USA relies on would be damaged. Even if the USA would launch such an attack, it may well enter the minds of NK that the USA wouldn't dare nuke it back for the reasons above. MAD only works when it's clear both sides have nothing to lose in a return strike.
Anyway, now NK threatens it will launch a second strike unless... It might put the USA in a nasty situation where it might have to negotiate.
Since MAD is compromised, the USA needs to look for another option to respond to such threats.
On the flipside, if you really wanted to nuke America, you would just sail a nuke into New Yorks harbor on a ship. There's no defense against that. It's pointless to spend billions of dollars when the system can be easily defeated.
One a side note: what happens when rogue states get advanced remote controlled, radar-invisible aircraft. How easy would it be to take out the white house or fly over a presidential photo op and drop some death from above? |
Excellent case for disarmament, good relations with neighbors and strong international cooperation on containment. |
IRan and North Korea won't disarm cause they have goals that are incompatable with disarming.
good relations with neigbors? The US has been hated and resented since the Soviet Union failed. The world resents superpowers. Nothing can be done about it.
There is no international cooparation on dismarment.
Excuse me this is international cooperation on disarmament
| Quote: |
Iran Elected to UN Disarmament Commission
By Julie Stahl
CNSNews.com Jerusalem Bureau Chief
April 17, 2006
Jerusalem (CNSNews.com) - Under threat of United Nations Security Council sanctions for its own nuclear program, Iran has been elected to a vice-chair position on the U.N. Disarmament Commission, whose mission includes deliberations on preventing the spread of nuclear weapons.
The commission's deliberations began last Monday and are scheduled to continue until April 28. On the first day of the commission meeting, Iran along with Uruguay and Chile was elected as one of eight vice-chairs, elected to serve for one year.
It happened on the same day that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad promised his people "good news" about the country's nuclear program.
The following day, Iran announced that it had managed to enrich uranium, a key ingredient in the production of a nuclear bomb. |
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBureaus.asp?Page=/ForeignBureaus/archive/200604/INT20060417c.html
Any questions?
Besides many in the world want the enemies of the US to survive cause if they were gone then the US would be far better off. That is not something that many in the world are comfortable with cause they resent there being hyperpowers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 8:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joo, history, and Saturday at the local pub, will tell you one thing: people like to fight. That is not the point.
History tells us, also, that power and greed are the major factors in most wars. That also is not the point.
Unless you hold that we should just go all Darwin, all the time and not bother aspiring to something more noble.
At this point, you speak as a true Darwinist: nuke 'em all and let god sort 'em out. Is that your intent? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 8:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Quote: |
| The coast guard inspects every single ship coming into port? Critics have been saying for a long time the ports are incredibly vulnerable. |
Ok but defense is possible. agreed? |
Sure, as a missile shield is theoretically possible. However, it's easy to appropriate billions for that and not for unsexy things like port security and containership inspection.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| Anyone could assemble it tomorrow if they really wanted to. An arab engineering student in the USA could cobble something together |
Something that evades radar with an explosive device or something more powerful? |
[/quote]
What do you think the radar return on a plastic RC airplane you can buy at Toys R Us is? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 11:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
Joo, history, and Saturday at the local pub, will tell you one thing: people like to fight. That is not the point.
History tells us, also, that power and greed are the major factors in most wars. That also is not the point.
Unless you hold that we should just go all Darwin, all the time and not bother aspiring to something more noble.
At this point, you speak as a true Darwinist: nuke 'em all and let god sort 'em out. Is that your intent? |
no but you ought to be able to see a difference between the two sides in a conflict and consider what each side fights for. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 5:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
At this point, you speak as a true Darwinist: nuke 'em all and let god sort 'em out. Is that your intent? |
To be 100% anal, Darwinist is the term creationists apply to us evolution believin' atheists. So we'd not actually say let god sort them out. So maybe more of a "let nature take its course", "the strong will come out on top", something like that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| What do you think the radar return on a plastic RC airplane you can buy at Toys R Us is? |
I dunno, however it would probably wouldn't fly if it were loaded with anything approaching serious explosives.
Tim McVeigh's truck was pretty heavy
to put this in perspective even South Korea can't manufacture high performance unmanned arial vehicles. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
