11-01-2004, 08:13 PM
|
#1
|
Lifetime Suspension
|
"We say to those tyrants who believe they can blackmail America and the free world -- you fire, we're going to shoot it down..."
I say, what a knob. Go ahead, fire them nookylear missles at us, our defense shield will knock 'em down. That is, IF it works!
Luke, I am your faaaaaaaather!
|
|
|
11-01-2004, 08:24 PM
|
#2
|
Has lived the dream!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Where I lay my head is home...
|
The stupid thing about this whole program is, what is the real threat from a rogue state or nation launching a missle at the U.S.? If a nuclear device goes off in the States it will be because it was smuggled in, or stolen and activated from within. For a nation to spend what it takes to get the technology for long range ballistic missiles AND to secure a successful nuclear program, well, there'd be no point in persuing it to fire off one missile. The country and it's leaders would have to have a serious death wish.
As September 11th 2001 showed, terrorists can be pretty resourceful using amazingly simple means.
The fact that the system doesn't even work very well yet just increases the stupidity of the whole idea.
It was because of this issue that I couldn't vote for the conservative party last election. Hmmmm, let's make ourselves a target, and spend BILLIONS of dollars for a system that we don't really need and doesn't work very well...
|
|
|
11-01-2004, 09:36 PM
|
#3
|
Such a pretty girl!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Calgary
|
I can't believe they are actually going ahead with it. It's not even ready.
This reminds me of the Bomarc missiles, and if Canada falls for it again, I'll be p*ssed.
__________________
|
|
|
11-02-2004, 03:45 AM
|
#4
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Section 218
|
I can't believe how much they are spending on this boneheaded policy to boot. MORE then 10 BILLION/year?!?!?!?
For a system that not only has NEVER worked, and has failed even rigged tests, but that is conceptually completely out of step with realistic threats to the American homeland. Yeish...
Claeren.
|
|
|
11-02-2004, 09:42 AM
|
#5
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: not lurking
|
Even if it does work as well as it's supposed to, the Russians have already developed missiles that can shift their flight quickly, making them basically maneuverable and immune to this type of missile shield. Granted, Russia isn't the greatest threat to the US right now, but if Russia can build it, how long will it be before China and North Korea, amongst others, develop similar missiles?
|
|
|
11-02-2004, 11:02 AM
|
#6
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Clinching Party
|
I figure that hey, if the Americans are going to build this thing and spend a fortune doing it, Canada might as well be getting some of that money and developing some technology. I mean if it's happening either way, might as well get something out of it. Standing on the sidelines isn't going to do anything except make your legs tired.
|
|
|
11-02-2004, 11:20 AM
|
#7
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver
|
Quote:
Originally posted by RougeUnderoos@Nov 2 2004, 06:02 PM
I figure that hey, if the Americans are going to build this thing and spend a fortune doing it, Canada might as well be getting some of that money and developing some technology. I mean if it's happening either way, might as well get something out of it. Standing on the sidelines isn't going to do anything except make your legs tired.
|
I say screw that. We should develop our own technology and work closer with Europe.
A little while ago, Canada devloped a new system for obtaining remotely sensed data that can produce images from space with a resolution of 3m^2 pixels, can see below the ocean, and in the dark, and the Americans refused to launch the satellite into space for us because they don't want to have something that good up there without having 100% control over it. So the Euros launched it for us. I say Canada takes the same approach from now on.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
|
|
|
11-02-2004, 11:28 AM
|
#8
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Clinching Party
|
Quote:
Originally posted by FlamesAddiction+Nov 2 2004, 12:20 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (FlamesAddiction @ Nov 2 2004, 12:20 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-RougeUnderoos@Nov 2 2004, 06:02 PM
I figure that hey, if the Americans are going to build this thing and spend a fortune doing it, Canada might as well be getting some of that money and developing some technology. I mean if it's happening either way, might as well get something out of it. Standing on the sidelines isn't going to do anything except make your legs tired.
|
I say screw that. We should develop our own technology and work closer with Europe.
A little while ago, Canada devloped a new system for obtaining remotely sensed data that can produce images from space with a resolution of 3m^2 pixels, and the Americans refused to launch the satellite into space for us because they don't want to have something that good up there without having 100% control over it. So the Euros launched it for us. I say Canada takes the same approach from now on. [/b][/quote]
I don't like the whole idea any more than you do, but it just seems like it's happening with or without us so might as well get something out of it. It's going to be built on Canadian soil (at least partly) and it's not something we can ignore. I'm all for working with the Europeans and doing whatever, but this Missile Defense seems to be happening and they are going to spend a fortune. Maybe we can get some of that money that would likely be going to Halliburton :P
I've never heard that story about the sattelite -- you have any more info on that?
|
|
|
11-02-2004, 11:28 AM
|
#9
|
Lifetime Suspension
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Market Mall Food Court
|
Why would anyone even fire nuclear missles anymore? Wouldn't it be easier just shipping it to the ports and then remotely detontating the bomb?
I watch too much 24! hehe
|
|
|
11-02-2004, 11:40 AM
|
#10
|
CP Pontiff
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: A pasture out by Millarville
|
The expenditure of $9.1 billion on this in the coming year represents about 2.2%of the $401 billion the USA is spending on defence this year.
That means 97.8% of their defence expenditure is on things other than missile defence.
While I'm sure its fair to argue the $9.1 billion that might be better spent elsewhere - you decide - I don't think the comparison to Star Wars under Reagan is valid. I think about $100 billion in 1980's dollars was spent on Star Wars, a far bigger impact item.
I would agree that declaring it "operational" when its obviously in its infancy seems to be lame given the dirth of success.
Cowperson
__________________
Dear Lord, help me to be the kind of person my dog thinks I am. - Anonymous
|
|
|
11-02-2004, 11:42 AM
|
#11
|
Lifetime Suspension
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Bertuzzied@Nov 2 2004, 12:28 PM
hehe
|
hehehehehehe
|
|
|
11-02-2004, 11:58 AM
|
#13
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Sector 7-G
|
So have we found someone to launch Radarsat-2? I'm sure the Russians or the Chinese have a Energiya or Long March kicking around they'd love to park that on....
And some further fodder for the missile shield debate: Go to the Dump, find Plutonium.
Dumpster Diving Russian Style
Got to love how this guy tried to turn in Plutonium at a Weapons Exchange Amnesty day...
Leonid: Hi I'm here to turn something in!
Cop: Yeah, yeah.... AK-47 or or Makarov pistol? Either gets you 2000 rubles...
Leonid: Uhhh....how about a weapon of mass destruction? I mean that's got to be at least worth a Big Mac at MickeyD's... so how about 20,000 rubles?
Cop: (covers groin with foil burger wrapper) Nyet!
While I do think the ICBM scenario might be mitigated by this Missile Defence Shield, I do think the greater risk comes from 3 guys and a shipping container....
|
|
|
11-02-2004, 11:59 AM
|
#14
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver
|
Quote:
Originally posted by I-Hate-Hulse@Nov 2 2004, 06:58 PM
So have we found someone to launch Radarsat-2? I'm sure the Russians or the Chinese have a Energiya or Long March kicking around they'd love to park that on....
|
I think we've already forwarded some money to the European space agency. I'm not 100% sure though.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
|
|
|
11-02-2004, 12:25 PM
|
#15
|
Such a pretty girl!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally posted by FlamesAddiction@Nov 2 2004, 02:45 PM
Canada has been pioneering this technology longer than anyone else and is far ahead of any other nation in this regard. It is by necessity since we are a natural resource based economy and this technology helps us manage them. As a bonus, we also have the ability to spy on countries from space better than anyone else. Just like the Arrow, the U.S. can't stand it.
|
Holy Crap. I didn't realize this happened. And 3m^2 isn't exactly better than their spy satellities, so I don't see why they would need to worry, especially when it's only us Canadians using it.
What a joke. It truly is just like the Arrow scenario. They are afraid our technology is better, so they prevent us and anyone else from using it. Then they sell us a missile protection system which won't be needed and is faulty, then leave it to rot on our soil while we have to pay for the clean-up in about 20 years.
__________________
|
|
|
11-02-2004, 12:27 PM
|
#16
|
Lifetime Suspension
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Calgary, AB
|
When I was on Vacation in California 5 years ago I actually saw one of the test's out of the blue, scared the sh*t out of me. It's not often you see a freaking rocket fly out of nowhere and into the sky.
later we found out we were near the Vandenburg Air Force base, pretty crazy.
|
|
|
11-02-2004, 12:55 PM
|
#17
|
CP Pontiff
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: A pasture out by Millarville
|
Quote:
Originally posted by FlamesAddiction+Nov 2 2004, 06:45 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (FlamesAddiction @ Nov 2 2004, 06:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-RougeUnderoos@Nov 2 2004, 06:28 PM
I've never heard that story about the sattelite -- you have any more info on that?
|
It's called RADARSAT-2.
http://www.ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca/ccrs/data/sats.../rsatndx_e.html
http://www.ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca/ccrs/data/sats.../mission_e.html
The U.S. refused to launch it because they think it is a threat to their national security:
http://www.exn.ca/Stories/1999/02/18/53.asp
http://www.cbc.ca/story/news/?/news/...8/cansat990218
Canada has been pioneering this technology longer than anyone else and is far ahead of any other nation in this regard. It is by necessity since we are a natural resource based economy and this technology helps us manage them. As a bonus, we also have the ability to spy on countries from space better than anyone else. Just like the Arrow, the U.S. can't stand it. [/b][/quote]
There's something missing from your stream of events though isn't there?
The NASA refusal is dated 1999 according to your links.
In 2000, Boeing, an American company, was awarded a contract to launch Radarsat-2 via a Delta rocket in April 2003 from Vandeburg Air Force Base in California. (Hey, I drove by their last year).
http://www.spaceref.ca/news/viewpr.html?pid=2135
Secondly, Radarsat-2 is scheduled for launch in late 2005 according to the schedule of Vandenburg AFB (at the bottom):
http://mocc.vandenberg.af.mil/launchsched.asp
Here's some pictures of the satellite being developed in 2004.
http://www.mda.ca/radarsat-2/news/rsat2_dev.shtml
So . . . . America IS effectively going to launch it.
Cowperson
__________________
Dear Lord, help me to be the kind of person my dog thinks I am. - Anonymous
|
|
|
11-02-2004, 01:02 PM
|
#18
|
Such a pretty girl!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally posted by SuperNilson@Nov 2 2004, 03:27 PM
When I was on Vacation in California 5 years ago I actually saw one of the test's out of the blue, scared the sh*t out of me. It's not often you see a freaking rocket fly out of nowhere and into the sky.
later we found out we were near the Vandenburg Air Force base, pretty crazy.
|
Actually, it is very common for me to see rockets flying into the sky. I build em
I could build one right now that the missile shield would have no chance in stopping, and only for a few hundred bucks. But I'm not going to do that, because it's wrong. (Note to CIA/FBI, I'm not going to do it!)
__________________
|
|
|
11-02-2004, 01:53 PM
|
#19
|
Has lived the dream!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Where I lay my head is home...
|
Don't the modern missiles that the U.S and Russia have also have cluster warheads that split apart sometime during their flight and drop somewhere between 6 and 12 bombs or warheads? These would have to be destroyed BEFORE they split to be effective against the threat.
|
|
|
11-02-2004, 01:59 PM
|
#20
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Clinching Party
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Daradon@Nov 2 2004, 02:53 PM
Don't the modern missiles that the U.S and Russia have also have cluster warheads that split apart sometime during their flight and drop somewhere between 6 and 12 bombs or warheads? These would have to be destroyed BEFORE they split to be effective against the threat.
|
Ssssssh!
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:00 PM.
|
|