Euro Missle Shield

[Yeager]

Good graphic here of the commie threat.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23399182-details/Blair+challenges+Putin+as+missiles+storm+escalates/article.do

The only person threatening europe with nuclear war is old uncle Vlad.

Maybe this missile shield is a good idea

[Vad]

Sorry, guys, I just don't understand - you are all playing fools, or you really have comprehension problems?

Make me a favour, take a look on a globe. Russian missiles will never fly to America over Europe. Missiles are always launched in direction of Earth rotating. They will be launched on the East - North-East from Siberia and Central Russia. Just few will be sent on West to destroy Europe, and most likely it will be middle and short range non ballistic missiles, defence is useless against them.

And who is talking about that 10 defence missiles. The USA put them there just to shut the mouth of Europe - "We are protecting you against Iran and North Korea attack!". Russia is talking about radar. It is important part of global US defence system, actually it will work as early warning radar. It is necessary part of global sysem because you need to know ASAP characteristic of missiles trajectories on the first part of the fly. And this radar covers the central part of Russia where most of mobile ICBMs are disposed.

BTW, 10 missiles can be very easily changed to 10000 missiles if you have all infrastructure in place.

[Viking]

Guys it is all irrelevant. Once the missiles start flying what does it matter that the US or Europe is glowing a little less than Russia or China? We'll all be dead anyways.

[CFYA]

I see where your coming from Vad on your last point but your incorrect in your launching direction. If a suprize attack on the USA from Russian base ICBMs would go directly over the North Pole. Rockets are normally launched with direction of the Earth to maximize payload. Even then the difference your talking about is only 10 percent compared to launching against the rotation of earth. Look at American based radars. There is a vast array stationed in northern Canada pointed north. The shortest distance is over the artic region giving the least amount of time to mobilize defense and attack forces.

You make a good point.....if nuclear weapons are used either heat, radiation, or nuclear winter will be the end of all of us.


CFYA

[Vad]

Originally posted by Viking
Guys it is all irrelevant. Once the missiles start flying what does it matter that the US or Europe is glowing a little less than Russia or China? We'll all be dead anyways.

Exactly! And this is the reason why all country in the world who have ICBMs shouldn't try to change existing balance. This balance has worked great for the last several tens of years, and should still be in place.

New US defence system is actually changing this balance. I don't want to say that our american friends will immediately launch all their missiles to Russia when this defence will be completed. No.
But with this defence in case of crisis like Cuban crisis our american friends possibly could be a little less cautious than they should be. And possibly could make a mistake pressing Russia too far. In this case there is a little possibility that Russia will take ofence, and will test this new American defence system, just to prove its useless. Or our American friends will try to test russian guidance officers how fast they can press the buttons.

Yes, we will all have few minutes to live after that, but the main idea of balance is "WE ALL".
While we all belive in this "WE ALL", we will be alive.

[Nilsen]

Originally posted by Shifty
LOL Nielson you're jumping conclusions AGAIN. Of course it's there to protect America , and Europe. Europe doesn't want it, don't put it up. Protect ourselves and leave Europe out of it.

You're typical of the everything American is evil attitude across the Atlantic. I say leave your kind to their own devices.

Europe is like the retarded kid in school, you can protect him from the bully, you can try and help him get through class. Then in return he wipes his boogers on your desk.

No thanks.

Calm down kid. No need to start inventing things just because you dont know whats going on in the world. jeebuz

[leitwolf]

CFYA, the US had a missle defense in the 70s. It's costs were over the top just like the technical details of the intercept missiles. (Search for Sprint/Spartan videos)

At the end of the day the soviet answer was "uhkay. we'll just build even more nukes" and the system was scrapped.

Why would you need to upset the balance of power once again?

[CFYA]

Im over this arguement....

IMO I would spend every dime I had on a missile defense network capable off stopping every last object.

Maybe then the Russian government would shut up for a change.

CFYA


BTW I know all about Spartan/Sprint even the Niki Hercules which is largely still classified.

[Shifty]

Originally posted by Nilsen
Calm down kid. No need to start inventing things just because you dont know whats going on in the world. jeebuz

Just more of the arrogance on display you try to mask as intelligence.

[EagleDNY]

Originally posted by Boroda
Quick arithmetics:

US is going to deploy 110 ABMs.

A "reliable" launch takes two missiles per target (I don't count incidents  like Lybia-86 when colleagues got 2 launches-2 kills). So it's 55 warheads intercepted in ideal conditions. Like 10 Soviet MIRVs. Go dig yourself a shelter, at your own expense, taxes you pay go down the drain.

OK - so what you just proved was that in fact, a US missile shield in Europe ISN'T actually a threat to Russia.  You know, maybe they really do want to just provide some limited protection against some terrorist idiots who buy some N. Korean missiles and mate them up with some future Iranian Nukes.  

Hey - Europe is free to make their own decisions.  If they don't want it, I say don't force the issue.  If, some day in the future, during a dispute with a nuclear-armed Iran, some european power faces nuclear blackmail because they can't intercept an inbound missile, then they can rethink the policy.

[EagleDNY]

As far as the Radars in Europe being "necessary" to protect America, don't worry - we've got plenty of other coverage.

[Dowding]

As far as the Radars in Europe being "necessary" to protect America, don't worry - we've got plenty of other coverage.

Without RAF Fylingdales, about 60 miles from where this post is being written, you haven't got jack.

At the end of the day cooperation benefits both the US and Europe on EW data. It's just a shame some Yanks haven't got an ounce of humility to admit that they actually need other people to help themselves. There are fools on both sides of the Atlantic, but I guess being an American board the percentage game comes into play.

[Nilsen]

Originally posted by Shifty
Just more of the arrogance on display you try to mask as intelligence.

 yes I am the arrogant one.


Find somewere else to troll  

[leitwolf]

Originally posted by CFYA
[..]IMO I would spend every dime I had on a missile defense network capable off stopping every last object.[..]

And the new one does that?

And it is worth pursuing, spending money on it, considering it might trigger development of better missiles?

Look, i'm not necessarily against any kind of missile defense, but what is the new system going to change? it's an honest question.

With the publicly available information, i dont see any use at all except for stirring up russian missile development - and it's not like the East/West haven't been able to kill everbody for decades already.

[john9001]

we have jack and he is watching you right now.