More About The Anti-Missile Test
The Washington Post reports on the successful anti-missile test yesterday. When I noted the event yesterday, I wrote that I thought it an amazing feat even though such tests are not completely realistic. The WaPo article spends the bulk of its article denigrating the test outright.
Anthony H. Cordesman, a defense expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said that the successful test is a step forward but that the military is a long way away from having a working anti-missile system. He described the U.S. capability as "very limited," requiring a far more intensive testing program.
"It's important to have the test, but you need a frequency and a level of testing that proves you can do this reliably," Cordesman said. "Is this a milestone of a kind? Yes. Does it prove we have a mature, ready system? No way."
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said last week during a visit to Alaska that he would like to see a full test of the missile system's capabilities. In a written statement about yesterday's test, Rumsfeld was cautious, saying the success should increase U.S. confidence as work proceeds toward developing an initial missile defense capability.
"Tests will continue, some of which will be successful and some of which will not," he said. "This was a challenging test, and the tests will become even more challenging in the period ahead."
Officials operating the system yesterday knew roughly when the target would be launched and where it would originate, Obering said, factors that in a real attack would be almost entirely unpredictable.
The military also has yet to fully deploy an advanced radar system — called X-band radar — that eventually will be located on a floating platform off Alaska's coast. Though the radar was tested yesterday off the coast of California, it has not been winterized for northern conditions. It is scheduled to be transferred to Alaska this fall.
The cost of yesterday's test was estimated at more than $85 million. The missile defense program has cost nearly $100 billion since it began in the early 1980s with President Ronald Reagan's "Star Wars" concept of space-based lasers.
Without tests like this, the system will never be capable of intercepting anything. With continued testing we may be able to negate the threat that rogue nations pose. It will take time, patience and testing to get the system to full operational capability. They have made enormous progress and some incredible technical strides.
By MrGone, Saturday, 2 September , 2006 @ 6:51 pm
With all due respect, these systems are a colossal waste of money and resources. Virtually all scientists and engineers in the field (fyi, I am one of these) know that the counter measures for all of the SDI systems are cheap and easy to achieve. For example, we were going to build lasers or particle beams to shoots missiles from the sky. That’s cool but guess what? If you introduce a simple spin to the missile, the energy buildup is insufficient to destroy the missile. Bummer. How ’bout the IR or radar tracking weapons? Hmm, when one is detected, you can just eject a series of reflective balloons and guess what? More futility. All real-world testing of these has drawn a big, fat, zero. Sure, tests have been constructed to demonstrate their “effectiveness” but these can’t be taken seriously. The patriot system was touted as spectacularly successful during the first Gulf war. Too bad the after action reports said they were spectacularly useless. While I’m sure Lockheed and others love them, they are in reality no true measure of protection. Just more industrial-military-congressional welfare.
By Gaius, Saturday, 2 September , 2006 @ 7:08 pm
So, then what options are left? Negotiating? With a country that has shown a complete diregard for the conventions of diplomacy? With a country that willingly starved as many as two million of its own people to death?
Think that will work?
What’s left then? You tell me. Let them kill us when they choose? Is that your option?
By MrGone, Saturday, 2 September , 2006 @ 7:32 pm
Sorry, I didn’t think that was the topic. I thought this was about the current “star wars” systems and whether they were effective or not. Maybe I missed the part about the “clash of civilisations.” Again, pardon me.
I would however suggest that if the US were serious about non-proliferation, it could start with itself and also help the former USSR dismantle its TENS OF THOUSANDS of warheads. It may be that showing leadership in this arena could prove to be more effective than saying, it’s ok for others to have these weapons, just NOT YOU. This line of diplomacy doesn’t appear to working so well does it? Maybe it’s time for a different approach. But that’s just a thought.
By Gaius, Saturday, 2 September , 2006 @ 7:38 pm
With that you showed you are fundamentally unserious. If you seriously believe a unilateral disarmnament would help, you really do not have a clue as to how the world really works. Judge others by your own standards at your own risk.
Not everyone thinks as you do. Some governments think nothing of starving two million of their own people to death. You think decency and reason will work? You think if the rest of the world disarms completely that they will?
By MrGone, Saturday, 2 September , 2006 @ 7:56 pm
Sorry, what you have shown is why nothing is getting done. I did not call for COMPLETE disarmament. We and Russia have enough weapons to ERADICATE all civilization on Earth many times over. At the same time we allow India, Pakistan, Israel and others to have these weapons without complaint or even protest. You don’t find that a bit disingenuous? You don’t think others see this? What I asked for is what we CLAIM to espouse, and that is leadership. If we are truly sincere about ridding the world of this threat, then we can obviously start with ourselves. Not complete, but certainly a ramp down. Realistically, how much of the planet do we need to have the capacity to annihilate? I don’t ask that we disarm. But how can we ask others to limit proliferation when we stand by and let THEIR enemies have these weapons. This is the vicious circle of proliferation. This is also what our current administration has failed, yes FAILED to address in any meaningful way.
By Gaius, Saturday, 2 September , 2006 @ 8:05 pm
Yeah it was only a short while ago that Clinton built down the aresenal by almost how many percent?
Oh, that’s right.
He didn’t. Going to blame him, too?
By MrGone, Saturday, 2 September , 2006 @ 8:13 pm
Of course I’ll blame him too! Is this about party affiliation? To me it’s about our, all of our, future. Sorry to be naive about it but we simply have to do better if we are to survive.
By MrGone, Saturday, 2 September , 2006 @ 8:18 pm
And by the way, if I recall correctly, back then there was a great deal of talk, activity, and funding regarding helping Russia secure it’s arsenal against guess what? Yup, loss and sale of weapons grade material to terrorists. What ever happened to that? I suppose that’s not so important anymore.
By Gaius, Saturday, 2 September , 2006 @ 8:47 pm
Last I heard it was still going on and the US nuclear industry was using the recovered pits to produce MOX fuel.
It is not a party thing at all, it is a reality thing. You are blaming this president for every, single, bloody failure that he inherited. And demand he fix it all - no matter that it is a long, long history of not geting it right.
And frankly I don’t give a crap or not if you believe me on this, I am not a Republican.
By MrGone, Saturday, 2 September , 2006 @ 9:02 pm
Gaius,
I’m not trying to get you upset. I’m also not trying to blame a particular party. The original post topic was about SDI or its successor. I, being in the business, have always been against it and continue to be so. It was you who decided to bring party/politics into the discussion. I only brought, money into it. I am neither a Republican nor a Democrat. I vote how I see fit at the time. I am not blaming this guy for anything but ignoring the proliferation issue. You may disagree, but you’d be hard pressed to give me any real evidence to the contrary.
We, the US, is mired down in Iraq. Like it or not, this has taken our focus away from THE very real threats that we now and will continue to face. I’m way past the blame game but we absolutely need to face facts. Iraq is not the only or most serious threat we face. To me, weapons, nuclear proliferation is and has been the big one. Sure we’re jumping up and down about Iran right now. But realistically, it’s getting bigger and bigger and we need to do something concrete, not just talk, and not just about Iran.
By Gaius, Saturday, 2 September , 2006 @ 9:26 pm
I have been saying all along that the whole world has got to address this issue, so you are preaching to the choir.