On 3/4/2014 8:29 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/4/14, 8:18 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


We are certainly going to avoid it, especially risking an exchange with
a nuclear weapon equipped adversary but are prepared to fight if
absolutely necessary. The main reason we haven't had to since WWII is
due to the overwhelming strength of the military capabilities of the USA
much of which is shared with our allies. The Russians know this as
does China. It's the crackpot leaders like in North Korea and the
religious fundamentalists who pose the greatest danger.

Putin is a thug, but I doubt he will risk a shooting war with the USA
either.

We're not "prepared to fight" anyone like the Russians or Chinese.
That's an absolutely meaningless statement. I do agree about your
assessment in North Korea and those countries run by the crazy
religious.

Putin would disagree with you which is why we haven't had a major war
involving nuclear weapons since WWII.

On 3/4/14, 8:32 AM, Tim wrote:
On Tuesday, March 4, 2014 7:08:14 AM UTC-6, F.O.A.D. wrote:



Oh, I'm not denying or minimizing the casualties...


Harry, You rarely minimize casualties, especially when bloating figures make a better point for you.


I have no idea what you mean by that, Tim.







That was true in Korea and in Vietnam,

as it was in Iraq. The military thinking for those events was that "the

enemy" was a a pushover and our troops "would be home soon."

If politicians hadn't stood in the way of either, our troops "would be home soon."


We have civilian rule, Tim. Politicians have always been "in the way" in
time of war. To think otherwise is to be naive.

On 3/4/14, 8:58 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/4/2014 8:29 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/4/14, 8:18 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


We are certainly going to avoid it, especially risking an exchange with
a nuclear weapon equipped adversary but are prepared to fight if
absolutely necessary. The main reason we haven't had to since WWII is
due to the overwhelming strength of the military capabilities of the USA
much of which is shared with our allies. The Russians know this as
does China. It's the crackpot leaders like in North Korea and the
religious fundamentalists who pose the greatest danger.

Putin is a thug, but I doubt he will risk a shooting war with the USA
either.

We're not "prepared to fight" anyone like the Russians or Chinese.
That's an absolutely meaningless statement. I do agree about your
assessment in North Korea and those countries run by the crazy
religious.

Putin would disagree with you which is why we haven't had a major war
involving nuclear weapons since WWII.



Rabble-rousing the public in both Russia and the United States has
proved to be a successful way to keep huge numbers of forces in uniform
and feed the military-industrial complex in both countries. The Russians
lost millions of people in WW II and they have no taste for another huge
war. I do think some of the Republicans in this country do, though,
including some Republican elected officials like Graham, McCain, and the
crazier teabaggers.

On 3/4/14, 9:11 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Tue, 04 Mar 2014 08:03:43 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

'Setting up' is not 'shooting'. Like most liberals, you like to put words in the mouths of others,
and then use them to build your arguments.

Stupid behavior.


Setting up for what purpose?

Brinkmanship?

On 3/4/2014 8:34 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/4/14, 8:24 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/4/2014 8:03 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/4/14, 7:55 AM, Poco Loco wrote:


You really are dense. Setting up a U.S. missile defense system in Poland
and the Czech Republic and shooting down Russian missiles is not a
shooting war? What would you call it?

What is the definition of a "defensive" or anti-missile system?
I guess in your view Poland and the Czech Republic should just suck it
up and take the hits if a shooting war ever broke out.



I guess I'll have to read up on our ability to shoot down the sort of
sophisticated missiles with decoys the Russkis have. Last time I read
about this, the success rate was...small. I don't think we are talking
about slow moving cruise missiles here, eh?


There are several currently deployed systems including the Aegis missile
defense system, Patriot missile defense system, Harpoon missile defense
system plus ever-evolving electronic countermeasure systems. One of the
newest to be deployed is a shipboard laser system that evolved out of
another program called ABL.

The company I had played a very minor but contributing role to the
development of laser based anti-missile systems. Some are brought to
production and deployment. Some are developed to a point of feasibility
under risk reduction programs but then put on the shelf for future use,
if and when required. An example is the ABL or "Airborne Laser". We
built the thin film vacuum deposition system for the key optical
elements during the development of this system. It was tested, worked
but funding was withdrawn for deployment in 2010. The technology exists.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6w-ql8msl0U

On 3/4/14, 9:32 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/4/2014 8:34 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/4/14, 8:24 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/4/2014 8:03 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/4/14, 7:55 AM, Poco Loco wrote:


You really are dense. Setting up a U.S. missile defense system in
Poland
and the Czech Republic and shooting down Russian missiles is not a
shooting war? What would you call it?

What is the definition of a "defensive" or anti-missile system?
I guess in your view Poland and the Czech Republic should just suck it
up and take the hits if a shooting war ever broke out.



I guess I'll have to read up on our ability to shoot down the sort of
sophisticated missiles with decoys the Russkis have. Last time I read
about this, the success rate was...small. I don't think we are talking
about slow moving cruise missiles here, eh?


There are several currently deployed systems including the Aegis missile
defense system, Patriot missile defense system, Harpoon missile defense
system plus ever-evolving electronic countermeasure systems. One of the
newest to be deployed is a shipboard laser system that evolved out of
another program called ABL.

The company I had played a very minor but contributing role to the
development of laser based anti-missile systems. Some are brought to
production and deployment. Some are developed to a point of feasibility
under risk reduction programs but then put on the shelf for future use,
if and when required. An example is the ABL or "Airborne Laser". We
built the thin film vacuum deposition system for the key optical
elements during the development of this system. It was tested, worked
but funding was withdrawn for deployment in 2010. The technology exists.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6w-ql8msl0U






The question I have is whether any of our anti-missile systems have the
capability of shooting down the more sophisticated missiles the Russians
have.

On 3/4/2014 8:55 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/4/14, 9:32 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/4/2014 8:34 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/4/14, 8:24 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/4/2014 8:03 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/4/14, 7:55 AM, Poco Loco wrote:


You really are dense. Setting up a U.S. missile defense system in
Poland
and the Czech Republic and shooting down Russian missiles is not a
shooting war? What would you call it?

What is the definition of a "defensive" or anti-missile system?
I guess in your view Poland and the Czech Republic should just suck it
up and take the hits if a shooting war ever broke out.



I guess I'll have to read up on our ability to shoot down the sort of
sophisticated missiles with decoys the Russkis have. Last time I read
about this, the success rate was...small. I don't think we are talking
about slow moving cruise missiles here, eh?


There are several currently deployed systems including the Aegis missile
defense system, Patriot missile defense system, Harpoon missile defense
system plus ever-evolving electronic countermeasure systems. One of the
newest to be deployed is a shipboard laser system that evolved out of
another program called ABL.

The company I had played a very minor but contributing role to the
development of laser based anti-missile systems. Some are brought to
production and deployment. Some are developed to a point of feasibility
under risk reduction programs but then put on the shelf for future use,
if and when required. An example is the ABL or "Airborne Laser". We
built the thin film vacuum deposition system for the key optical
elements during the development of this system. It was tested, worked
but funding was withdrawn for deployment in 2010. The technology exists.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6w-ql8msl0U






The question I have is whether any of our anti-missile systems have the
capability of shooting down the more sophisticated missiles the Russians
have.

Why don't you ask Andy Borrowed wits?

On 3/4/2014 9:55 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/4/14, 9:32 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/4/2014 8:34 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/4/14, 8:24 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/4/2014 8:03 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/4/14, 7:55 AM, Poco Loco wrote:


You really are dense. Setting up a U.S. missile defense system in
Poland
and the Czech Republic and shooting down Russian missiles is not a
shooting war? What would you call it?

What is the definition of a "defensive" or anti-missile system?
I guess in your view Poland and the Czech Republic should just suck it
up and take the hits if a shooting war ever broke out.



I guess I'll have to read up on our ability to shoot down the sort of
sophisticated missiles with decoys the Russkis have. Last time I read
about this, the success rate was...small. I don't think we are talking
about slow moving cruise missiles here, eh?


There are several currently deployed systems including the Aegis missile
defense system, Patriot missile defense system, Harpoon missile defense
system plus ever-evolving electronic countermeasure systems. One of the
newest to be deployed is a shipboard laser system that evolved out of
another program called ABL.

The company I had played a very minor but contributing role to the
development of laser based anti-missile systems. Some are brought to
production and deployment. Some are developed to a point of feasibility
under risk reduction programs but then put on the shelf for future use,
if and when required. An example is the ABL or "Airborne Laser". We
built the thin film vacuum deposition system for the key optical
elements during the development of this system. It was tested, worked
but funding was withdrawn for deployment in 2010. The technology exists.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6w-ql8msl0U






The question I have is whether any of our anti-missile systems have the
capability of shooting down the more sophisticated missiles the Russians
have.


I could tell you but then I'd have to kill you.

Ask Raytheon.

On 3/4/14, 10:05 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/4/2014 9:55 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/4/14, 9:32 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/4/2014 8:34 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/4/14, 8:24 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/4/2014 8:03 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/4/14, 7:55 AM, Poco Loco wrote:


You really are dense. Setting up a U.S. missile defense system in
Poland
and the Czech Republic and shooting down Russian missiles is not a
shooting war? What would you call it?

What is the definition of a "defensive" or anti-missile system?
I guess in your view Poland and the Czech Republic should just suck it
up and take the hits if a shooting war ever broke out.



I guess I'll have to read up on our ability to shoot down the sort of
sophisticated missiles with decoys the Russkis have. Last time I read
about this, the success rate was...small. I don't think we are talking
about slow moving cruise missiles here, eh?


There are several currently deployed systems including the Aegis missile
defense system, Patriot missile defense system, Harpoon missile defense
system plus ever-evolving electronic countermeasure systems. One of the
newest to be deployed is a shipboard laser system that evolved out of
another program called ABL.

The company I had played a very minor but contributing role to the
development of laser based anti-missile systems. Some are brought to
production and deployment. Some are developed to a point of feasibility
under risk reduction programs but then put on the shelf for future use,
if and when required. An example is the ABL or "Airborne Laser". We
built the thin film vacuum deposition system for the key optical
elements during the development of this system. It was tested, worked
but funding was withdrawn for deployment in 2010. The technology
exists.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6w-ql8msl0U






The question I have is whether any of our anti-missile systems have the
capability of shooting down the more sophisticated missiles the Russians
have.


I could tell you but then I'd have to kill you.

Ask Raytheon.



Seriously, I haven't seen the results of any meaningful tests. I have
read reports that the more modern, sophisticated missiles have their own
defensive capabilities, including the ability to scatter dummy warheads
that confuse defensive weapons, and also hardened electronics that
resist efforts to turn them askew. It's one thing for a Patriot battery
to shoot down what are the equivalent of large scale Chinese bottle
rockets and another to take down a modern Russian missile.

On 3/4/2014 10:11 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/4/14, 10:05 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/4/2014 9:55 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/4/14, 9:32 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/4/2014 8:34 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/4/14, 8:24 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/4/2014 8:03 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/4/14, 7:55 AM, Poco Loco wrote:


You really are dense. Setting up a U.S. missile defense system in
Poland
and the Czech Republic and shooting down Russian missiles is not a
shooting war? What would you call it?

What is the definition of a "defensive" or anti-missile system?
I guess in your view Poland and the Czech Republic should just
suck it
up and take the hits if a shooting war ever broke out.



I guess I'll have to read up on our ability to shoot down the sort of
sophisticated missiles with decoys the Russkis have. Last time I read
about this, the success rate was...small. I don't think we are talking
about slow moving cruise missiles here, eh?


There are several currently deployed systems including the Aegis
missile
defense system, Patriot missile defense system, Harpoon missile defense
system plus ever-evolving electronic countermeasure systems. One of
the
newest to be deployed is a shipboard laser system that evolved out of
another program called ABL.

The company I had played a very minor but contributing role to the
development of laser based anti-missile systems. Some are brought to
production and deployment. Some are developed to a point of feasibility
under risk reduction programs but then put on the shelf for future use,
if and when required. An example is the ABL or "Airborne Laser". We
built the thin film vacuum deposition system for the key optical
elements during the development of this system. It was tested, worked
but funding was withdrawn for deployment in 2010. The technology
exists.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6w-ql8msl0U






The question I have is whether any of our anti-missile systems have the
capability of shooting down the more sophisticated missiles the Russians
have.


I could tell you but then I'd have to kill you.

Ask Raytheon.



Seriously, I haven't seen the results of any meaningful tests. I have
read reports that the more modern, sophisticated missiles have their own
defensive capabilities, including the ability to scatter dummy warheads
that confuse defensive weapons, and also hardened electronics that
resist efforts to turn them askew. It's one thing for a Patriot battery
to shoot down what are the equivalent of large scale Chinese bottle
rockets and another to take down a modern Russian missile.


Again, you would be amazed at the technology that exists but is not
widely known. It doesn't make any practical sense to advertise
capabilities or how they work for the more advanced systems we have.
The ones you hear of are those that are made available for deployment by
our allies. There are systems that remain unique to the USA that allies
have no knowledge of.

As of 2000 (the last time I was involved with any defense related
programs) the USA was about 20 years ahead of the Russians in terms of
advanced technology systems.

A good example were the helicopters used in the bin Laden raid. They
had equipment and technology that was unheard of until one of them
crashed during the raid. Nobody, outside of the Pentagon and defense
contractors knew they existed.