The US Missile Defense System Is Only 50% Accurate Against North Korea

[Sistine Chapel]

In other words we're fucked plain and simple. Better practice our North Korean style military high step once they subjegate our asses.

Here are some snippets..

How Would the U.S. Defend Against a North Korean Nuclear Attack?
By Chloe Whiteaker, Jeremy Scott Diamond and Tony Capaccio
September 8, 2017...

After successfully testing two intercontinental ballistic missiles and a bomb with far more destructive power than those dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the North Korean nuclear threat has never been more credible.

The U.S. missile defense system is a global network with 24-hour surveillance by land-, sea- and space-based sensors, all of which are constantly looking for signs of anything amiss in North Korea. So what would that response look like? It’s impossible to say exactly, with so many variables in play and almost as many failures as successes in tests, but this is theoretically how the system should work.

If North Korea were to launch a missile, U.S. satellites would detect it almost instantaneously through infrared signals. In less than a minute, the satellite would raise the alarm, and the command and control center at Schriever Air Force Base near Colorado Springs, Colorado would spring into action.

The command center in Colorado would direct the radars in the region to track the missile as it climbed toward outer space. During that five- to seven-minute stretch, the TPY-2 and SPY-1 radar systems would be gathering data like trajectory, velocity and altitude to send back to the command center so they can figure out what type of missile was launched and whether it could reach the U.S.

This “boost phase” is actually the ideal time to intercept a missile, but the current defense system isn’t equipped to do so yet.

Ground-Based Interceptors (GBI) are the only weapon capable of destroying an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), and they’ve only been tested against such a missile once—with success. The U.S. only has 36 GBIs in the field—four in California and 32 in Alaska—and would likely launch a few per incoming missile to improve the odds of success during an attack.

That stockpile is expected to expand to 44 by the end of the year, but it’s not hard to imagine how the U.S. defense could theoretically be overpowered if North Korea were to fire multiple missiles. The Pentagon said in June that it can protect the nation from “a small number” of missiles—not a barrage.

Lol we are fucked if Pyongyang goes all in.

[Jackie S]

Which is more reason why we should take Kim Dung Dipshit and his entire staff out.

The US can do it. It's time to get serious.

Then, just let China have the Shithole Country. That will satisfy them and their reluctance to see the Korean Peninsula reunited.

[flghtr65]

Under this scenario California or the west coast of the USA might get hit. The range of the last missile that NK tested could reach the USA but just to the west coast. The article does not say what would happen to NK when we launch back. NK would be destroyed, so we won't need to worry about "high stepping" LOL.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Sistine Chapel

In other words we're fucked plain and simple. Better practice our North Korean style military high step once they subjegate our asses.

Two points from your misinformed post ...

1. You should move to California quickly.
2. You have provided justification for a preventive strike.

Both 1 and 2 would make Texas Great Again!

[Sistine Chapel]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Two points from your misinformed post ...

1. You should move to California quickly.
2. You have provided justification for a preventive strike.

Both 1 and 2 would make Texas Great Again!

I empathize with you. It must suck to be so angry with me till all you can do is try to start shit on every thread. I feel sorry that you've let me affect you in such profound ways. I guess a black man is on the come up emotionally affecting the white man which is a major accomplishment.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Sistine Chapel

I empathize with you. It must suck to be so angry with me till all you can do is try to start shit on every thread.

Oh, don't give yourself so much credit, if any at all. You don't make me "angry," and it's obvious you don't know me or have a clue about me. I actually believe you are pathetic, and you constantly demonstrate it. My reading of this thread is ... like everyone you start .....

... you stir the shit and it stinks!

I'm "conflicted" as to whether the stench is you or the shit...

... or both!

But since you decided to elevate this discussion to an "intellectual level" ....

... what "reason" do you give as to WHY YOUR BLACK PRESIDENT for the eight years he took up space in the Peoples' House with his "hate America" bride DIDN'T IMPROVE THE MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEM to prevent NK or the Iranians or any other terrorist group from striking the U.S. or any of our allies with nuclear missiles?

He had EIGHT YEARS! Rather than piss off money supporting a bankrupt solar panel business, etc, and give money to the Terrorist State of Iran .... and send his bride on buying sprees with her family to Spain .... Or is he that INCOMPETENT?

NEVER MIND .... I think I know the answer:




So, you're not worthy of making anyone "angry"!

But I can understand why you are struggling for relevance.

[Sistine Chapel]

Originally Posted by flghtr65

Under this scenario California or the west coast of the USA might get hit. The range of the last missile that NK tested could reach the USA but just to the west coast. The article does not say what would happen to NK when we launch back. NK would be destroyed, so we won't need to worry about "high stepping" LOL.

I agree with this assessment even though you have to realize that China and Russia are allies of North Korea. In the event of WW3 I just see no way for the US and it's allies to defeat an Axis power of China, Russia, Iran, North Korea along with the Muslim Brotherhood, and Host of terrorist organizations. Keep in mind Russia owns more nukes than we do and China has the technology and largest military fleet in the world. The generals and commanders in China and Russia are extremely disciplined towards the destruction of America. They don't have Generals like John Kelly getting bogged down in social issues. Russia has the US halfway beat already by owning the US President and propagandizing all of Trump's supporters to the point they don't even realize they're all now treasonous benedict arnolds. In other words Trump's supporters don't realize they've been mentally conqured by Russia. It is fascinating to witness.

[00 gauge]

flghtr65 says "Under this scenario California or the west coast of the USA might get hit" ..... well now, that certainly puts the command and control center at Schriever AFB near Colorado Springs in a pickle ..... hmmm what to do? ..... If they can accurately predict that California is the intended target, do they direct the radars to track the incoming missiles and figure out which missiles are required to respond to the attack? ..... Or do they simply decide that's the perfect time to call it a day and head on home? .....

[gnadfly]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Two points from your misinformed post ...

1. You should move to California quickly.
2. You have provided justification for a preventive strike.

Both 1 and 2 would make Texas Great Again!

You are wrong Lex. Cyst should move to North Korea.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by gnadfly

You are wrong Lex. Cyst should move to North Korea.

Well, I was being realistic. NK wouldn't have him!

He fits in nicely in Pelosi Country.

(I keep posting "he" without any verification of SissyLip's gender!)

[flghtr65]

Originally Posted by Sistine Chapel

Keep in mind Russia owns more nukes than we do and China has the technology and largest military fleet in the world.

It's true that Russia has a little bit more ICBM's than the USA. The difference is not that big. It's like 600 for Russia and 530 for the USA. If they launched all theirs and we launched all of ours you would end up with a lot land that would be not fit for living (sort of like what you see in the Mel Gibson Mad Max movies of the 1980's). Putkin is Trump's buddy, he wouldn't do a first strike against the USA.

http://es.rice.edu/projects/Poli378/...tg_invent.html

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by flghtr65

It's true that Russia has a little bit more ICBM's than the USA. The difference is not that big. It's like 600 for Russia and 530 for the USA. If they launched all theirs and we launched all of ours you would end up with a lot land that would be not fit for living (sort of like what you see in the Mel Gibson Mad Max movies of the 1980's). Putkin is Trump's buddy, he wouldn't do a first strike against the USA.

http://es.rice.edu/projects/Poli378/...tg_invent.html

SissyLips and Flighty join together to evaluate the U.S. "missile defense" system and end up talking about "launch numbers" .... a couple of issues ....

... you guys are accustomed to purchasing "Saturday night specials" to use as a "defense" and you are "secure" with the notion that all six of the rounds are in place in the cylinder.

A long time ago the NYPD determined that the average "gun fight" involving an officer expended less than 3 rounds (I said average)! That meant one of two things: One of the participants were unable to fire more than average of 3 rounds ... either disabled or dead.

Historically the Soviet Union aka the Russians now (for some reason) had more "warheads" in the final count than the U.S. They even had "multiple entry" vehicles carrying multiple warheads. The Houston to San Antonio corridor was "marked" as Ground Zero for a Soviet missile launch ... for the "industrial" complex in Houston (with a port) and multiple military bases in S.A. ... including a fine medical facility and aircraft repair base. The strategy was to drop as many warheads into the "area" to assure that irreparable damage could be done and the warheads had no "guidance" components ... just arch and momentum when the entry was complete.

The U.S. strategy was to develop refined guidance systems to steer the warhead into the target area so the blast would take out the intended targets effectively and "economically" ... so as a consequence it would only take two warheads to "resolve" an area like S.A. and the Houston ship channel/industrial/petrochemical area in the Soviet Union.

If anyone recalls the dawn of the first "Gulf War" with "Professor" Schwarzkopf narrating the direct hits on targets with the "smart" bombs (and the little guy running across the bridge who he said was the luckiest guy in the world right before the bomb hit in the cross-hairs painted in the video).

It was a SHOCK to the Soviets ... much like the atomic bombs were a SHOCK to the Japanese. War was no longer "who had the most" ... it was who could use the least to get the same results and more effectively and efficiently.

When the NK thug picks up his "red phone" in his bunker and the line is "dead" .... it'll be: 젠장 ....jenjang.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Sistine Chapel

In the event of WW3 I just see no way for the US and it's allies to defeat an Axis power of China, Russia, Iran, North Korea along with the Muslim Brotherhood, and Host of terrorist organizations. Keep in mind Russia owns more nukes than we do and China has the technology and largest military fleet in the world. The generals and commanders in China and Russia are extremely disciplined towards the destruction of America.

You should thank your Black President and the one who pretended to be a Black President from 1993 to 2001. 16 years of degrading the U.S. military .... it'll take Trump about 16 months to get back on track ... even though he is White.

Doesn't that fit with your racist assessment?

[gnadfly]

The truth is none of these weapons have been fully tested. From MIRVs to "ICBM missile defense systems." BTW, we don't want them "fully tested" either.

[LexusLover]

When "deployed" our motor vehicles are not "fully tested" for crash worthiness either, but we still "deploy" them and hope they won't be "fully tested," but nonetheless they will be and have been.

If the other guy believes you won't pull the trigger, regardless of the "reason," it is more likely that one will have to pull the trigger.