Is, always has been, and always will be 100% snakeoil. The countermeasures used to protect missiles from defense are inherently cheaper, easier, and more numerous to make and deploy:
ucsusa.org
News 2/6
Bentley Torres
Parker Hughes
Those things don't exactly have a long shelf life, so… probably not.
Camden Kelly
jesus christ this is like a trainwreck but i just cant stop myself from staring at it
even the most basic point defense and kinetic kill vehicles are cost effective against missiles today
you are quoting literal 1980s technology and some fucking mathematically illiterate journalist without a faintest clue of what he pretends he knows about
do you seriously think that the most strategic, the most competitive, the most phds hiring (phds that matter here), the most secretive, the most financed sector of the most powerful nations are still stuck with… 'confusable sensors'?
son just how many satellites do you think are around in all the orbits? its a military secret officially, but in truth they lost count how many secret launches they carry out per year, every other weather and communications/commercial civilian satellite could be armed with a missile destroyer for all we know
the new way of delivering nukes are the hypersonic vehicles that do not even have a need for space but are hypersonic capable even at low heights where the atmosphere is most dense
we aeronautics now
Ian Evans
It's more like SAD, since climate scientists figured out nuclear winter in the '80s. Self-assured destruction.
Blake Parker
And it matters for nothing because the number of nuclear strikes required to 'kill USA' before they could strike back (retarded anyway) would propel enough ash into the atmosphere to guarantee nuclear winter.
Juan Mitchell
who fucking cares, its subzero temperatures in eastern europe already and siberia has enough fissile matter to keep us warm and food producing for as long as it takes us to emerge as the total planetary permanent overlords for at least like 15 centuries if the first strike hits
Cameron Kelly
The GMD system they're referring to is a technically similar system that was developed and deployed at about the same time as the S-400. Moreover, the UCC aren't "some journalists", they're the foremost authority on the failings of "muh winnable war" propaganda.
The simple fact is that missile defense, even in the far simpler application of theater-scale combat operation, has demonstrated what may well be an 0% intercept rate in terms of the ability to destroy a target, rather than merely winging it in a way that would be wholly insufficient to disable or knock far enough off-target a nuclear weapon. Even in controlled tests, intercept rates (and the authenticity of the conditions in those tests) are absolutely laughable.
ABM is pseudoscientific pork, period.
Zachary Phillips
son
your ballistic missile (ballistic means predictable trajectory)
it has to pass through a cloud of satellites
any of those satellites could be a warhead itself, put there for the sole purpose of fucking up your missile and all of its warheads
not even to mention regular combat air patrols over all relevant airspace already at around 70 kilometers above ground, and the stationed drones above that that have both point defense, kinetic vehicles AND the [current year] sensors, not some decimeter or centimetric radars that they used back in the 80s which is what you are quoting
and those dumb journalists, even if they have a graduate degree in the most piss easy disciplines like.. organic chemistry and civil engineering (guess they are scientists, of sorts, they practice scientific method on a superficial scale) they do not have access to the secret bunker labs and constructor yards which produce hypersonic gliders that outclass icbms categorically
you can still blow up the earth just not with icbms that shit is cold war tier outdated now
Oliver Martin
I'll just pretend you didn't say that
Absolute liquid dogshit flimflam at least you didn't mention "muh x-ray pumped masers":
allthingsnuclear.org
The system described in that article was deployed in the 2000s, just like Russia's.
Sebastian Nelson
i really dont get your stubbornness
first of all, modern radar ignores decoys, second of all even almaz antey can knock down a trident class icbm at the price of 400 million $
i mean here are the things you know nothing about:
aesa en.wikipedia.org
dipole antenna en.wikipedia.org
noise figure en.wikipedia.org
i mean this is complex masters level electronic engineering but still, 'radar dont real, decoy equals magic' 80s nonsense where they could trick radars with rubber balloons or whatever the heck crazy times of icbm they had back then, worthless today