New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

Russian military leaders have expressed concern about US plans for a national missile defense system. Will defense technology be limited by possibilities for a strategic imbalance? Is this just SDI all over again?

whitebeach1 - 01:12am May 1, 2001 EST (#2858 of 2863)

Forget the minor detail that the ABM hasn't worked and won't work no matter how many billions are funneled to W's contributors. Let's just look at one simple question: We've come through something like forty years facing an enemy armed with roughly ten thousand nuclear warheads. How is it that suddenly we need a crash program to develop an ABM defense against enemies who, all put together, don't have enough missiles to fill one Trident sub?

riggor37 - 01:19am May 1, 2001 EST (#2859 of 2863)

We must maintain our missle defense system and upgrade it when we need to. No treaty should ever limit our ability to defend ourselves. We should not be listening to any other country who tries to tell us how or when we can defend ourselves.

possumdag - 01:20am May 1, 2001 EST (#2860 of 2863)
Possumdag@excite.com

"We've come through something like forty years facing an enemy armed with roughly ten thousand nuclear warheads."

Sounds as if the brain of the emeny was sufficiently functional to permit life, as we know it, to continue.

johnmg27 - 01:23am May 1, 2001 EST (#2861 of 2863)

Sorry whitebeachl, your argument is totally flawed. The NMD, at its earliest and in its most rudimentary form would be able to stop only a handful to perhaps 20 incoming warheads -- just what would be needed to defend some crazed Third World leader, hell bent on destroying U.S. cities. Also, this defense will be quickly improved upon, and will become a potent shield against a possible Chinese attack.

whitebeach1 - 01:35am May 1, 2001 EST (#2862 of 2863)

johnmg27 5/1/01 1:23am

The NMD, at its earliest and in its most rudimentary form would be able to stop only a handful to perhaps 20 incoming warheads -- just what would be needed to defend some crazed Third World leader, hell bent on destroying U.S. cities.

My God, you're right! If only we'd had the NMD in time to stop those crazed maniacs who landed a missile in the World Trade Center, or that McVeigh clown who dropped one onto Oklahoma City.

whitebeach1 - 01:41am May 1, 2001 EST (#2863 of 2863)

johnmg27 5/1/01 1:23am

Also, this defense will be quickly improved upon, and will become a potent shield against a possible Chinese attack.

Quickly?

It's been in the works for close to twenty years and still couldn't shoot down the Goodyear blimp except by mistake.

Use your head, John.

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense