1 posted on
11/02/2005 12:32:55 PM PST by
RDTF
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-32 next last
To: RDTF
Defense, apparently, can almost always be overcome by a good offensive weapon or system.
2 posted on
11/02/2005 12:35:11 PM PST by
RexBeach
("The rest of the world is three drinks behind." -Humphrey Bogart)
To: RDTF
Apparently the Russians want to restart the Cold War.
To: RDTF
I believe missle defense is intended to protect us from the nutjobs in the Axis of Evil launching one or two missles, and not from thousands of warheads raining down upon us from Russia.
6 posted on
11/02/2005 12:37:18 PM PST by
VeniVidiVici
(What, me worry?)
To: RDTF
9 posted on
11/02/2005 12:38:46 PM PST by
bmwcyle
(We broke Pink's Code and found a terrorist message)
To: RDTF
The system isn't designed to make us immune, but it is a nice insurance policy if one (or just a few) are popped off accidentally (or purposely).
To: RDTF
12 posted on
11/02/2005 12:41:16 PM PST by
billorites
(freepo ergo sum)
To: RDTF
Am I correct in imagining some cartoon looking flight path for these missiles?
14 posted on
11/02/2005 12:47:02 PM PST by
smith288
(Peace at all cost makes for tyranny free of charge...)
To: RDTF
After the successful Test, the whole team was rewarded by treating them to "real" dinner. They also gained the privelege of having their heating on for at least a month.
To: RDTF
18 ABMs won't stop a broadsides. They might well stop 18 warheads, even maneuverable ones, but that is only a handful of MIRVs.
18 posted on
11/02/2005 12:53:16 PM PST by
RightWhale
(Repeal the law of the excluded middle)
To: RDTF
"The unpredictable flight trajectory of the Russian missile makes it immune to destruction"
Perhaps with our current system, but could a 'brilliant pebbles' type system still destroy it ?
To: RDTF
Uh, huh. Any bets as to the winner of a lateral acceleration contest between an ICBM and an EKV?
To: RDTF
I imagine that if a fighter jet could not maneuver out of the way of one of our patriot missiles, then the Russians may be in for a big surprise with their touting that their missile is harder to hit.
To: RDTF
But, but, this mf russians where broke! But, but, they are our friends!!!! NOT. And all the apologist for Russia in this forum, can kiss my A$$. No apology from me.
31 posted on
11/02/2005 1:14:55 PM PST by
gedeon3
To: RDTF
'Unpredictable trajectory' is about as close to an oxymoron as I can imagine.
33 posted on
11/02/2005 1:20:02 PM PST by
dhuffman@awod.com
(The conspiracy of ignorance masquerades as common sense.)
To: RDTF
The unpredictable flight trajectory of the Russian missile makes it immune to destruction I love the hubris in this statement.
34 posted on
11/02/2005 1:20:54 PM PST by
The_Victor
(If all I want is a warm feeling, I should just wet my pants.)
To: RDTF
So how many kilograms of weapon mass have to be removed to make room for the additional kilograms of reaction mass necessary to effect the course changes?
(steely)
39 posted on
11/02/2005 1:27:28 PM PST by
Steely Tom
(Fortunately, the Bill of Rights doesn't include the word 'is'.)
To: RDTF
The Topol-M missile:
There have apparently been bugs in the target selection algorithms. "On the other hand...."
43 posted on
11/02/2005 1:32:55 PM PST by
r9etb
To: RDTF
IMO..another justification for pre-emption.
44 posted on
11/02/2005 1:33:23 PM PST by
Banjoguy
(I will rot in Hell before I buy another Dell!)
To: RDTF
I'm no rocket scientist, but wouldn't anything other than the shortest distance from A to B make for a much longer flight time?
To: RDTF
Lol!
It may be able to outflank Patriots, or other mechanical defenses, but that's not all we have, IMHO.
Heck, I'm just a lowly EE, and I could write a program to fire a laser at about anything that can be detected. And I am not that smart.
And we do have lasers. IMHO.
We've even overcome atmospheric distortion. IMHO.
Did I say, IMHO?
46 posted on
11/02/2005 1:39:28 PM PST by
MonroeDNA
(Look for the union label--on the bat crashing through your windshield!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-32 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson