3 ms·

I think this would hold more weight if he hadn't backed down from the missile defense program and instead pushed hard to set it up in key points around the worl

by thismat 17y ago

I think this would hold more weight if he hadn't backed down from the missile defense program and instead pushed hard to set it up in key points around the world. What better way to encourage peace then to start building anti-nuke stations around the world to nullify that threat from all parties.

jacquesm 17y ago
The operative word in there is 'nullify', anything over '0' is not acceptable, and just about everybody agrees that 100% kill rate isn't going to be achievable. So effectively this shield will do exactly nothing, the only thing it guarantees is that if there will be an attack it will be a lot more massive. Some thing during the cold war, the stockpiles were enormous, not because we needed the power to destroy the world several times over, but because launch facilities might be destroyed. Also, first strikes will be directed against the areas involved in the missile shield, because after that the rest is wide open. I see the whole missile defense shield as an attempt to revive the cold war because it's good for defense contractors, those guys made untold billions.
- thismat 17y ago
  It seems we're talking in two different places about the same subject, haha. I do see your point, and it does seem logical. It definitely would be nice though to remove the threat of any nuclear attack from or against any nation for the foreseeable future. Though I guess a nuclear strike might be less devastating than years of war in the long run huh? What a chilling world we live in.
  - jacquesm 17y ago
    True enough. But still, if I have to worry about terrorists and failed states that seems to somehow be more acceptable than to have two superpowers on hair trigger 24x7, where any stupid move or misinterpretation can lead to a huge disaster. There is a list somewhere of the number of 'close shaves', too long and too close to have any confidence that such a state could be maintained indefinitely. That was just a matter of time.

by thismat 17y ago

jacquesm 17y ago

The operative word in there is 'nullify', anything over '0' is not acceptable, and just about everybody agrees that 100% kill rate isn't going to be achievable. So effectively this shield will do exactly nothing, the only thing it guarantees is that if there will be an attack it will be a lot more massive. Some thing during the cold war, the stockpiles were enormous, not because we needed the power to destroy the world several times over, but because launch facilities might be destroyed. Also, first strikes will be directed against the areas involved in the missile shield, because after that the rest is wide open. I see the whole missile defense shield as an attempt to revive the cold war because it's good for defense contractors, those guys made untold billions.

thismat 17y ago
It seems we're talking in two different places about the same subject, haha. I do see your point, and it does seem logical. It definitely would be nice though to remove the threat of any nuclear attack from or against any nation for the foreseeable future. Though I guess a nuclear strike might be less devastating than years of war in the long run huh? What a chilling world we live in.
- jacquesm 17y ago
  True enough. But still, if I have to worry about terrorists and failed states that seems to somehow be more acceptable than to have two superpowers on hair trigger 24x7, where any stupid move or misinterpretation can lead to a huge disaster. There is a list somewhere of the number of 'close shaves', too long and too close to have any confidence that such a state could be maintained indefinitely. That was just a matter of time.