Finally Laser Missile defense...

[insein]

http://news.myway.com/top/article/id/401978|top|05-07-2004::08:06|reuters.html

Israeli-U.S. Laser Downs Long-Range Missile in Test


Email this story

May 7, 7:54 AM (ET)

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - A laser beam under joint Israeli-U.S. development destroyed a long-range rocket for the first time in a test in the skies over the American Southwest, Israel's Defense Ministry said on Friday.
Israel has sought an effective defense against ballistic missiles since 1991 when Iraq launched Scuds into the Jewish state during the first Gulf War. It has since developed the Arrow anti-ballistic missile with U.S. funding.

"This is a significant step forward," a ministry spokesman said of the test on May 4 of the "Nautilus" Mobile Tactical High Energy Laser (MTHEL) held at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico.

Israel sees the Nautilus as another potential countermeasure to possible ballistic attack by enemies, which would include most Arab states and Iran. In turn, they see Israel's undeclared nuclear arsenal as the biggest strategic threat to the region.

The Nautilus laser is being developed mainly by U.S. aerospace giant Northrop Grumman Corp with the help of several Israeli high-tech firms specializing in optics and military hardware.

"The (Nautilus) project has the potential to fill an important operational need for Israel," said Shmuel Keren, the Israeli military's director of weapons systems and infrastructure development.

"The (Nautilus) system can answer our need for a system which can intercept missiles and cruise missiles for which currently there is no effective solution."

The Defense Ministry declined to elaborate on the test or the exact range of the intercepted missile.

In earlier tests the MTHEL laser had successfully eliminated 28 short-range Katyusha rockets and five artillery shells in flight as well as several "hostile objects" on the ground.

Definitely a good thing for the defense of this country as well as Israel and other countries that face possible missile threats. With Kim Jong Il selling Long range missiles to the highest bidder, this is definitely a good thing.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Finally, trillions of dollars later, we are finally safe from the Soviets!

 

[insein]

Originally posted by SpidermanTuba
Finally, trillions of dollars later, we are finally safe from the Soviets!

No Reagan took care of the soviets with the mere threat of SDI. Having completed it allows us to defend against unknown enemies from anywhere on the globe.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Having completed it allows us to defend against unknown enemies from anywhere on the globe.

Right, unknown enemies with ICBMs. Sure.

No Reagan took care of the soviets with the mere threat of SDI.

That's right, the Soviets didn't fail because Communism failed, they failed because Regean kept threatening to break his treaty obligations and put the entire world at risk of nuclear destruction.

 

[insein]

Originally posted by SpidermanTuba
Right, unknown enemies with ICBMs. Sure.

You see NK selling to the highest bidder? Who do you think is in the market for some Long range missiles? PErhaps Al Queda? And where is Al Queda located? All over the globe? Ahh i see the answer was rhetorical.

That's right, the Soviets didn't fail because Communism failed, they failed because Regean kept threatening to break his treaty obligations and put the entire world at risk of nuclear destruction.

That is correct sir. Reagan forced the Soviets hand. Instead of creating a nuclear freeze of which only the US would have been expected to uphold, Reagan told the soviets to disarm or else. If left uncontested like in the previous Administration, the Soviets could have gained more land and more countries to further its strength and resources so that it could sustain itself longer. Reagan simply sped up the process by calling them on the Evil Empire that they were. This resulted in no new land being attained b the Soviets which forced them to rely on their depleting resources that they were scrambling to use to create more weapons to further establish their reign of terror.

So yes Communism would have failed, but would it have happened in 1989 had Reagan not stood up to them.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

You see NK selling to the highest bidder? Who do you think is in the market for some Long range missiles? PErhaps Al
Queda? And where is Al Queda located? All over the globe?

I suppose Al Qaeda has missile silos all over the world, too. You know, an ICBM isn't exactly a shoulder fired missile.

. Instead of creating a nuclear freeze of which only the US would have been expected to uphold, Reagan told the soviets to disarm or else.

That's a nice little piece of revisionist history, where'd you pick that one up from? Disarm - or what? Or else WHAT?

If left uncontested like in the previous Administration, the Soviets could have gained more land and more countries to further its strength and resources so that it could sustain itself longer.

You mean how Reagan left Iraq uncontested, allowing them to amass a huge arsenal of WMD to murder people with?

 

[insein]

Originally posted by SpidermanTuba

That's a nice little piece of revisionist history, where'd you pick that one up from? Disarm - or what? Or else WHAT?

Perhaps you should go back and take a look at what happened.

You mean how Reagan left Iraq uncontested, allowing them to amass a huge arsenal of WMD to murder people with?

Yes compare iraq to The Soviet Union thats cute. Besides i thought he didnt have WMDs according to you guys? I thought that was a lie? Is that why we have the shift towards Bush is killing civilians?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Yes compare iraq to The Soviet Union thats cute. Besides i thought he didnt have WMDs according to you guys? I thought that was a lie? Is that why we have the shift towards Bush is killing civilians?

Gee, have you ever heard of a little thing called "time?" You see, the way "time" works is that things change, and what is "today" may not have been "yesterday." Are you getting it yet? You're probably wondering what "time" has to do with anything - this is it. You see, 20 years ago, when Reagan armed Hussein with WMD, was a different "time." The WMD that Hussein had in the 80's and early 90's can't hurt us now , you have nothing to worry about. Do you understand now? How time works? How someone might be able to have WMD in the 80's that he can't hurt people with in the 00's because he doesn't have any WMD in the 00's? Do you get it now? See, now that wasn't too hard, was it? Now when people remark that no WMD have been found, you'll understand that what they mean is no WMD have been found in this time.

 

[insein]

Originally posted by SpidermanTuba
Gee, have you ever heard of a little thing called "time?" You see, the way "time" works is that things change, and what is "today" may not have been "yesterday." Are you getting it yet? You're probably wondering what "time" has to do with anything - this is it. You see, 20 years ago, when Reagan armed Hussein with WMD, was a different "time." The WMD that Hussein had in the 80's and early 90's can't hurt us now , you have nothing to worry about. Do you understand now? How time works? How someone might be able to have WMD in the 80's that he can't hurt people with in the 00's because he doesn't have any WMD in the 00's? Do you get it now? See, now that wasn't too hard, was it? Now when people remark that no WMD have been found, you'll understand that what they mean is no WMD have been found in this time.

I guess i don't when i have the whole world telling me that he has WMD's and that nukes are on the way. When France, Germany, the UN, Clinton, Kerry, Teddy Kennedy along with the CIA, Powell, Condi and Bush are telling me that Iraq has WMDs and is going to have nukes, i usually tend to listen.

 

[Avatar4321]

I see so. since we are no longer threatened by the soviets we shouldnt develop a missle defense in case some rogue dictator like Castro got Nukes and tried to hold the world hostage?

If we used that logic with the gun, the bullet proof vest never would have been built.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

I guess i don't when i have the whole world telling me that he has WMD's and that nukes are on the way. When France, Germany,

Since when do you listen to what France and Germany have to say? When they tell you what you want to hear?

the UN,

The UN? You're a liar.

Clinton, Kerry, Teddy Kennedy

Since when you do listen to these guys? I wasn't aware Clinton was a member of the government at the time Bush decided to invade Iraq.

CIA,

The CIA also said Hussein was highly unlikely to use his WMD unless we attacked him. You and Shrub weren't listening then, were you? Why? They weren't telling you what you wanted to hear?

i usually tend to listen.

Yes, I'm sure you listen to every word that Clinton, Kerry, the UN, and Kennedy say, you are such great admirers of them. That's believable, sure.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

I see so. since we are no longer threatened by the soviets we shouldnt develop a missle defense in case some rogue dictator like Castro got Nukes and tried to hold the world hostage?

First off, if Castro got Nukes, our anti ballistic missile system would be useless. Castro does not have to put missiles into suborbit to get them the Florida. He can almost just lob bombs at us with a catapult. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the shield takes down missiles while in space, so if the missiles never go into space, the shield is useless. Secondly, Castro wouldn't nuke the US anyway. You apparenly don't understand MAD theory. Casto would not nuke us because we would swiftly respond by nuking his ass and melting the entire Island of Cuba into molten rock in an instant (providing quit a nice light show for the Miamians, I'm sure). Castro knows this, he wants to hold onto power and not die, so he's not going to nuke us.
The answer to your question, is no. Should we build elaborate underground caverns just in case aliens decide to come and take over the earth's surface one day?

If we used that logic with the gun, the bullet proof vest never would have been built.

If we applied your simplistic powers of analogy to everything, wouldn't life be grand? If you can't see the difference between defending yourself from a known threat and wasting billions of dollars to defend yourself from a virtually impossible threat, well, then I guess you can't see the difference.

 

[CrazyLiberal]

Trillions of dollars that could be much better spent.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

- What's up with those mega quotes in your post's? oughta just try hitting the quote button and making your replies a little easier to read!

My bad, I'll not break the quotes up so much in the future.