[lit-ideas] Re: Two Cheers for Missile Defense
- From: "Andreas Ramos" <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2006 16:28:38 -0700
Eric: Hawaii and Alaska are in the US last I noticed.
N. Korea's missile in theory can reach the western edge of Alaska. Ice floes. And we know
Bush doesn't care about polar bears, anymore than he cares about Blacks.
And that's in theory only.
Can it reach Hawaii? Eric, look at a globe and figure it out.
Can it carry a nuclear warhead? Have the Koreans redesigned their nuclear device to fit into
a missile? Can the device survive 50g's of pressure during takeoff?
Eric: That's the old (but convincing)argument against using
missile shields to counter a Chinese nuclear attack. It does
NOT refute using a missile shield to counter a North Korean
or terrorist sortie.
Because Korea won't launch a single missile. To present a plausible threat, they would
launch two or three. One would certainly get through and destroy some ice floes.
Let's review this "shield".
In ten tests, it has worked only five times. 50% success rate.
In one test, the missiles failed to even leave their silo. They just sat there. This
happened on a test that was prepared and planned for months in advance. In a real situation,
the system would have to be launch-ready with seconds of notice, 24 hours a day. That's
unlikely.
In the five "successes", the target had a homing device on it so the killer missile could
find it. Even with homing devices on the failed tests, it couldn't hit the target. I don't
think North Korea will put a homing device on their missile. Do you?
In all ten tests, the killer missile knew precisely the target missile's speed, trajectory
(path), weight, and so on. Does anyone here think North Korea will supply this information
prior to an attack? No, I suspect not.
In the most recent test, the military said only it was to gather data. They did not expect
to hit the target.
This "shield" is useless. It's like the hunter who can only shoot a duck in a barrel. If the
duck is sitting still.
Eric, having the shield INCREASES danger. We all know that Bush is an idiot. He doesn't
understand big words. If Bush gets the idea that missile defense really works, then he'll
think he can just push North Korea around (and anyone else). He starts a war, thinking he is
invincible, and they'll get desperate and shoot back.
Here's a story for you.
Kenny, a friend of mine in high school, was a cop nut. He loved the police. He wanted to be
a cop. He carried around a police radio scanner, so he could listen to the police. After
high school, he joined the police. The very first day, he was driving around in his police
car and he got a call about a domestic argument. Husband and wife were fighting, and she
said he said he was going to kill her. So Ken goes racing down the streets, all lights
ablaze, skids up to the house, pulls out his gun, kicks down the door, and charges in. The
husband turned around and shot him dead. One bullet to the chest.
Kenny thought that with the police uniform, the badge, and the gun, he was Authority. He
went charging into that house because he was safe. He was a nice kid and he meant well. But
he made a fatal mistake.
Andreas: Real security comes through substainable, lasting
peace. Why is it that you prefer racist wars instead of peace?
Eric: Why do you prefer the lunatic "why can't we all get
along?" strategy? It has never, ever, not once, worked
without military strength behind it, either in the form of
convincing deterrence or in the aftermath of a decisive
defeat of the enemy.
Let's see... peace has never worked? There's no peace between Florida and Georgia? No peace
between Oregon and Washington state?
Peace does work, and it works nearly everywhere. Most of the world is at peace with its
neighbors. THere are only a few countries with wars. It's people like you and Lawrence who
cheer those wars on.
And Eric, that's all you do. You talk. If you were serious, you'd do something. Why should
anyone listen to you, when you don't even listen to yourself?
Further, to call US actions "racist" is supremely laughable
in the global context of Islamofascism and rogue states.
No, I'm saying your fears are racist. For example, you worry about the threat only with
regards to the USA. What about a Korean missile against Japan? India? China? Didn't even
cross your mind, did it?
You're looking for a super wizard technical solution to your fears. It's not out there. It
won't happen. Never. Isn't it ironic? I live and work in Silicon Valley, and I'm telling you
that technology isn't the solution.
The USA spent some six trillion dollars on nuclear weapons in the Cold War. The facts? The
USSR was incapable of attacking the USA. There never was a threat. Are we better off for
wasting that money? Look at our health care system, our schools, our crumbling roads, our
abandoned inner cities, and our politicians in Washington. The threat isn't a darky out
there. The problems are in our own system, and we need to fix them.
Last night at dinner, I asked everyone at the table "Will Bush attack Iran before the
November elections?" The consensus was yes. It'll be stupid, hopeless, unsuccessful. But the
GOP is in very serious trouble and may lose heavily in the elections. If he starts a war, he
could win the elections. Afterwards, well, who cares? It's only loser-class, er, lower-class
American boys, mostly Blacks and Latino, who will die in Iran.
yrs,
andreas
www.andreas.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
