Our laser interceptors do not even work. Conventionally we remain dominant, but we are unable to defend against attacks on our satellites, we cannot defend against an EMP attack. We are more vulnerable that you might think.
As for the laser issue, there have been mixed reviews, but I honestly doubt for security reasons we are getting the whole story with the lasers. Nevertheless we are leading the world in laser technology. We are also the leaders in long range ballistic missle interceptors. Just 6 weeks ago I was driving next to Fort Greely, Alaska. Where part of the system is located. They have had some luck with thier equipment and it is being constantly refined.
As for EMP attacks, that of course would be among the worse case scenarios and probably lead to a signifigant nuclear exchange, probably ending humanity as we know it. Outside of some specialized buildings, including virtually all civilian circuitboards would be fried. There is no real practical defense. The defense against such an attack is the overwhelming nuclear capability we possess that deters anyone from doing this.
No it is not the entire answer, but it is a big piece of the answer in my opinion. I am also not entirely convinced that mutual assured destruction remains relevant today.
It certainly has gotten us where we are today in terms of no nuclear warfare since 1945. It certainly remains relevant when it comes to our dealings with other major nuclear powers. Specifically China and Russia. Where it isnt applicable is the non-government sponsored scenario, but even then it is. Because from what I understand nuclear fallout is fairly quickly traced back to its origin and the necessary retaliation can ensue.
I think if you play the Cold War out 100 times, we have nuclear war in at least half the scenarios. The idea that there will never be a nuclear war seems far fetched to me, especially as more and more countries go nuclear.
Well if I found a genie bottle somewhere, one of my three wishes will be for nuclear weapons to go away. I hope nukes are never used in anger again.
But as more countries do become nuclear, it increases the MADD factor. Iran, Pakistan, NKorea and anyone else who might have them against America's best interest is made very aware that if they use one, we will respond accordingly and thier own country will cease to exist. The knowledge that using offensive nuclear weapons against an American ally result in the utter destruction of everything in thier own country is one hell of a good reason not to.
Further, how can you rely on mutually assured destruction when all your satellites can be shot down and you are wide open to an EMP attack, as well as a nuclear attack. Forward submarines do you no good if you cannot communicate with them.
Shooting down sattelites is very difficult. While it can be done, I dont think anyone has the capacity, now or in the near future where they will be able to inflict signifigant damage to the overall communications system of the US government, especially to the point where it couldnt order deployed boomer subs to launch thier ordinance.
I would like to see a missile defense platform developed that works and put into space to protect our satellites, and if not I want to see a plan in place to run the military without any satellites. I would like to spell out what the response to an EMP attack is. I would like to develop new missiles and better warheads to maintain our nuclear superiority, and I would like to see weapons systems such as the F-22 obviously continued and expanded.
You and I are generally in agreement here. I have trust that those who need to know those sort of things are able to do thier jobs, fully briefed and trained for when the unimaginable should happen.
There are a lot of things I would like to see, obviously many of them are not going to happen however.
I think we all have our lists.