Wouldn't it be simpler to just pre-position spybot/killbot packages in low earth orbit over trouble spots, and then call them in as needed. Sure there's an upfront cost, but it puts them even closer to the action, with the added benefit of no ICBM launches during the actual crisis at hand? #icbm
@Canoehead: its that there upfront cost that would keep this from leaving the drawing board. I mean, imagine if no conflict arose in the region that the military predicted, all that peace would make the designers look like fools (and waste taxpayer money). but this here ICBM idea can be sent anywhere, and we wouldnt have to worry about wasting resources because we would all be dead when the russians launch their nuclear ICBMs in retaliation to our spybot ICBM. #icbm
@minibeardeath: Get richard brandson to put them in low earth orbit. I think he only charges 50k per seat. You could buy the whole cabin in need be. A single tomahawk missile is over $1M, so i expect ICBMs would be much more.
i have no idea if i'm being sarcastic or not
I think the problem was first brought to light with the 1990s Clinton-uses-a-cruise-missile-to-kill-a-camel-and-a-tent "strikes" against Al Qeada. The US used Tomahawks, which are essentially very small subsonic aircraft, launched from off the Pakistani coast. Of course, they had to warn the Pakistanis that they were on the way(don't want to start an accidental nuke war between India and Pakistan), and the missiles' low cruise speed gave the Pakistanis plenty of time to warn Bin Laden and for Bin Laden to decamp. #icbm
In response to your assertation that we'd rush to defend those fledgeling democracies...
are you freakin high or what? did you forget about russia's invasion and current occupation of Georgia???
Obama is going to be the end of us all. And I used to be on one of those aegis ships for 5 years, dont hold your breath in thinking its better by itself instead of in concert with other strategic forces.
It really depends what ship is in the area and their record.
Stealing from previous commenters, what will they use these for? Peace of course. This and their 2 nuclear facilities will all be for the greater good of the Iranian people through clean energy. Am I right?
That aside, I hope the UN does something about this. It is rather obvious that nuclear weapons and a delivery system can be built by Iran and that they are well on their way. While the Iranian government may never directly use these, they might sell these weapons or accidentally lose them to terrorist groups and then we'd have a major catastrophe.
All the EMP from the whole world nuking itself would destroy our computers and phones and then what would the survivors of the apocalypse do to entertain ourselves when we weren't running and screaming away from zombies! Oh the horror!
So what if they have missiles, they're just defending themselves. Just because someone has missiles doesn't mean they are gonna use them to bomb people for no reason.
@bagellord: After what happened in iraq are you really surprised that they feel the need to be able to defend themselves? (they do have oil reserrves). Also, the missiles are not pointed at anyone, so yes, bad analogy.
@Sam: We get more oil from countries like Angola than we do the Middle East.
@Coulterboy: We don't need the bombs, we thought we needed them during the cold war, and now it would be too dangerous and expensive to get rid of them. So we keep them just in case. I hope that we never ever need to use nukes.
Anyways, I'm all for peace and ending the need for bombs and guns etc, but that's not going to happen any time soon, if ever.
@bagellord: "Anyways, I'm all for peace and ending the need for bombs and guns etc, but that's not going to happen any time soon, if ever"
I agree with you on that one. Where's Superman when you need him?
Since Obama scrapped the current missile defense that was going to be finished relatively soon (2011'ish) we will have NO long distance missile defense (I.e. nukes) for....oh, I don't know....more than 5 YEARS (2016 or more). Not to mention he is severely straining ties with Europe since he moved the missile defense from Poland/Czech Republic and left a lot of countries defenseless.
@Professional_Iceberg_Hunter: do you really think that missile defense system was to deter Iran from attacking Poland? Maybe we should put missile defense in Malaysia to deter an attack from Mongolia.
@mynameisjoe: Of course it wasn't going to be put there to stop Iran, but it was an added bonus. They were going to be put there to send a signal to Russia that we won't tolerate their growing appetite for the good old days of puppet governments and satellite states. They were a signal to the free governments in Eastern Europe that the US wouldn't abandon their fledgling democracies.
We're not about to abandon the eastern democracies. If Russia tried to invade we would have all out war. The Russians know this. A few anti-missile systems which can't counter advanced Russian missiles in the first place wouldn't change a bloody thing other than to antagonize the Russians. It was a lose-lose situation.
And as I poster earlier in response to Professional_Iceberg, we have a number of anti-missile systems with which we are replacing this static shield. Namely the Aegis navy missile system and Patriot missile batteries. These are mobile (far better than static) and can be put in place today. I don't know where this 2016 number is coming from. We've lost little if anything and gained much by this move; I fail to see the downside.
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
@qbrad:
11/18/09
#tips
11/17/09
11/18/09
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/18/09
i have no idea if i'm being sarcastic or not
11/18/09
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/17/09
Don't woorrryyy. This one will be designed with Hello Kitty figures. #icbm
09/28/09
09/28/09
09/29/09
09/28/09
In response to your assertation that we'd rush to defend those fledgeling democracies...
are you freakin high or what? did you forget about russia's invasion and current occupation of Georgia???
Obama is going to be the end of us all. And I used to be on one of those aegis ships for 5 years, dont hold your breath in thinking its better by itself instead of in concert with other strategic forces.
It really depends what ship is in the area and their record.
09/28/09
You have no idea what you're talking about.
09/28/09
09/28/09
09/28/09
09/28/09
I run Iran!
09/28/09
09/28/09
That aside, I hope the UN does something about this. It is rather obvious that nuclear weapons and a delivery system can be built by Iran and that they are well on their way. While the Iranian government may never directly use these, they might sell these weapons or accidentally lose them to terrorist groups and then we'd have a major catastrophe.
All the EMP from the whole world nuking itself would destroy our computers and phones and then what would the survivors of the apocalypse do to entertain ourselves when we weren't running and screaming away from zombies! Oh the horror!
09/28/09
09/28/09
09/28/09
09/28/09
09/28/09
Ok, bad analogy. But who are they defending themselves against exactly to where they would need missiles like this?
09/28/09
09/28/09
@Coulterboy: We don't need the bombs, we thought we needed them during the cold war, and now it would be too dangerous and expensive to get rid of them. So we keep them just in case. I hope that we never ever need to use nukes.
Anyways, I'm all for peace and ending the need for bombs and guns etc, but that's not going to happen any time soon, if ever.
09/28/09
I agree with you on that one. Where's Superman when you need him?
09/28/09
09/28/09
09/28/09
09/28/09
We're not about to abandon the eastern democracies. If Russia tried to invade we would have all out war. The Russians know this. A few anti-missile systems which can't counter advanced Russian missiles in the first place wouldn't change a bloody thing other than to antagonize the Russians. It was a lose-lose situation.
And as I poster earlier in response to Professional_Iceberg, we have a number of anti-missile systems with which we are replacing this static shield. Namely the Aegis navy missile system and Patriot missile batteries. These are mobile (far better than static) and can be put in place today. I don't know where this 2016 number is coming from. We've lost little if anything and gained much by this move; I fail to see the downside.
09/28/09
Says Who Weet?
Last i checked our current administration is surrendering everything we have to our enemies.
Removing our pitiful defenses from Eastern Europe was just the start.
09/28/09
09/28/09
Troll is a troll.
09/28/09