> There isn't any need for secrecy. The Russian hypothesis we're discussing here is that these are not defensive weapons, they are secretly offensive weapons.

> There isn't any need for secrecy. The Russian hypothesis we're discussing here is that these are not defensive weapons, they are secretly offensive weapons. Strictly speaking, there would be a legal need for secrecy until we're fully withdrawn from the INF treaty. You'd also have to develop the nuclear warhead to fly on the interceptors in secret. They'd have to be awfully lightweight, since these interceptors aren't designed to carry a nuclear warhead. (a quick look at wiki indicates the RIM-161 uses a kinetic energy warhead, which is a little hint at how silly it is to even be having this discussion) So that's a weapons program you'd have to fund in secret, as well as the funding needed to adapt all those weapons systems to a completely different purpose and test them. You'd have to keep the whole thing secret from those among our NATO allies who would never approve such a thing. Great idea. None of this would give the United States any first strike capabilities it doesn't already have thanks to its navy. I'm trying to be polite but this is all very silly. It's just not what those systems are there for.