Missile Defense: The Multiple Kill Vehicle

[Mr. Shaman]

Geez Rob, you really are a war hawk...military this, military that, who can we attack next?...kill kill kill,..I mean you absolutely revel in the thought of death and destruction. I can almost see you drooling.

Hey....you know....the "conservatives'" ultimate dream-scenerio is to be the next "John Wayne" (especially if they don't have to participate; directly.)

​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

It is not a good point since it costs nowhere near this much.

oooooooooooooooo.....Geeeeeeee.......whatta defense.

​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Popeye, Lockheed does not even have the main contract to do the MKV. Raytheon does. It is not a hovering machine gun. You are simply displaying ignorance in an attempt to characterize it in this manner.

....And, you've provided ZERO details to support your argument.

Whatta shocker.

​

 

[BigRob]

Hey....you know....the "conservatives'" ultimate dream-scenerio is to be the next "John Wayne" (especially if they don't have to participate; directly.)

​

Shaman, the point of missile defense is to save civilian lives. Why do you oppose saving civilian lives?

 

[BigRob]

....And, you've provided ZERO details to support your argument.

Whatta shocker.

​

Feel free to prove me wrong. Would you like all the footnotes to the introduction that I wrote?

 

[BigRob]

oooooooooooooooo.....Geeeeeeee.......whatta defense.

​

Popeye: This plan costs trillions and therefore we do not need it.
Me: This plan costs nowhere near that much money , that argument is not valid.
Shaman: What a defense!

Shaman, your lunatic rants do not even make sense.

 

[The Scotsman]

It is not a good point since it costs nowhere near this much.

........also a very good point......

On 07 January 2004 Lockheed Martin announced it has won a contract from the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) to further develop and demonstrate the first system capable of destroying multiple ballistic missile threats and decoys with a single launch. The eight-year contract is valued at approximately $760 million; the initial 11-month contract is valued at $27 million. The U.S. Army Space & Missile Defense Command in Huntsville, Ala., manages the program for the MDA. The selection of Lockheed Martin follows a 19-month concept development phase in which the company defined its MKV design, including the carrier vehicle and the kill vehicle subsystem; as well as the program plan, schedule and cost estimates for development and production.

 

[Mr.Dysfunctional]

Geez Rob, you really are a war hawk...military this, military that, who can we attack next?...kill kill kill,..I mean you absolutely revel in the thought of death and destruction. I can almost see you drooling.

The country's going broke and you want to waste trillions on star wars defense systems...man, go play with your army men instead, that ought to fix you for awhile.

Just the same as we see you drooling at the chance to call your opponents hate-mongers bigots (( when in fact it can be seen your the proponent for racial divide continuation !!! ))

When you can subjectively criticize your protractors without resorting to name calling and racial epitaphs ... then maybe we will put weight in your above statement.

If not for people like Big Rob.. The U.S. would be ran by soft shoe, limp spined , weenies who would bend over every time a foriegn offical was offended. Preparediness for conflicts is not war-mongering.

 

[The Scotsman]

preparediness for conflicts is not war-mongering.

......but is it useful? In terms of the field of nuclear defensive/offensive weapons I mean - rushing to arm yourself against a threat that may or may not exist in a time frame that may or may not match your continuing technological direction or intelligence profiles. The ultimate goal of course being to counter a weapon or system which in all probablility will not be deployed. Why not just simply use threat as your best defence!

I guess it depends upon your philosophical bent as your method of deterent - to whether you think that threat of overwhelming force is better than tinkering with technology to produce a marginal advantage!

 

[BigRob]

........also a very good point......

In November 2008, Raytheon was given the contract.

 

[BigRob]

......but is it useful? In terms of the field of nuclear defensive/offensive weapons I mean - rushing to arm yourself against a threat that may or may not exist in a time frame that may or may not match your continuing technological direction or intelligence profiles. The ultimate goal of course being to counter a weapon or system which in all probablility will not be deployed. Why not just simply use threat as your best defence!

I guess it depends upon your philosophical bent as your method of deterent - to whether you think that threat of overwhelming force is better than tinkering with technology to produce a marginal advantage!

As I pointed out in the original posts, the MKV is not only needed, it needs to be essential. An incoming threat cluster is not just a simple warhead. The MKV takes the guesswork out of trying to identify which of the incoming threats is an actual warhead by just eliminating all incoming threats.

 

[Popeye]

Popeye, Lockheed does not even have the main contract to do the MKV. Raytheon does. It is not a hovering machine gun. You are simply displaying ignorance in an attempt to characterize it in this manner.

Looks like a hovering machine gun to me:

 

[BigRob]

Looks like a hovering machine gun to me:

Because you do not know what you are talking about. Further, Lockheed does not even have the contact.

And I ask you again, why do you oppose the ability to kill an incoming missile?

 

[Andy]

Because you do not know what you are talking about. Further, Lockheed does not even have the contact.

And I ask you again, why do you oppose the ability to kill an incoming missile?

Because if we could stop incoming missile, then we might be safe from income nuclear warheads, which of course would piss off people with nuclear war heads, and cause them to fire all their missiles at us because we can stop them, which ultimately would end up causing world war III, because clearly if we're safer, then the world is less safe....

Basically, if you are completely insane, the missile defense is bad.

 

[BigRob]

......but is it useful? In terms of the field of nuclear defensive/offensive weapons I mean - rushing to arm yourself against a threat that may or may not exist in a time frame that may or may not match your continuing technological direction or intelligence profiles. The ultimate goal of course being to counter a weapon or system which in all probablility will not be deployed. Why not just simply use threat as your best defence!

I guess it depends upon your philosophical bent as your method of deterent - to whether you think that threat of overwhelming force is better than tinkering with technology to produce a marginal advantage!

Yom Kippur War. Arab states banded together and attacked what was widely believed to be a nuclear armed Israel. Possession/threats failed in this regard.

How many failures can you risk? One is one to many in my view. You have to be able to answer this question if you believe in deterrence. What happens if deterrence fails? If you cannot answer that question, then in my view you have a fundamental problem.