Jump to content

Faulty Missile Defense System


Recommended Posts

Journalist W.J. Hennigan wrote for The Los Angeles Times 5 July 2013:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency once again missed hitting its desired target during flight test of an interceptor missile from Vandenberg Air Force Base, northwest of Santa Barbara. The failure of the $214-million test Friday involved a ground-based defense system, designed by Boeing Co., to defend the U.S. from long-range ballistic missile attacks. The Missile Defense Agency now has a testing record of eight hits out of 16 intercept attempts... It’s a significant blow for the ground-based system of 30 interceptors in Alaska and California, which the Government Accountability Office estimated would cost taxpayers $40 billion from 1996 to 2017.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Well, at least we can intercept half of the destructive missiles sent our way in a missile war.


Journalist William Broad wrote for The New York Times 8 March 2003:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

At the request of the government, a federal judge has dismissed a suit against a contractor for the nation's antimissile defense system. The judge agreed with the government's contention that national security would be endangered if the suit went forward.


The suit was brought by Dr. Nira Schwartz, an engineer who once worked for the contractor, TRW Inc. Dr. Schwartz has long argued that the key component of the system is flawed and that the company and the government have conspired to cover up its problems. Dr. Schwartz worked on the system when she was employed by TRW.


The government had argued that hearing her suit in court would result in public disclosure of information that would harm national security.


Judge Ronald S. W. Lew of the Federal District Court in Los Angeles agreed. "The only way to eliminate the security risk posed by these lawsuits is to dismiss them," Judge Lew said in a decision on Feb. 24, according to a court transcript.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




"Mr. Speaker, I also want to point my colleagues to a story that ran just the last few days where we now have seen that Danny Stillman has evidence and material he collected that shows that the Chinese were aggressively trying to acquire supercomputers so that they could miniaturize their nuclear weapons. Up until 1996, China had no supercomputers. That was the year President Clinton lowered the standard and within 2 years China acquired 700 supercomputers. The information Danny Stillman allegedly has given us the details as to how China uses the supercomputers we gave them to build miniature weapons, nuclear weapons to be used against us and our allies. Right now, the Department of Defense and Department of Energy are refusing to allow Danny Stiillman's notes to be made public. I am today writing Secretary Rumsfeld and the administration to demand that these questions be answered. As a member of the Cox Committee that looked at the issue in deth, we need to know for sure what impact the President's decision in 1996 had to allow China to develop miniature nuclear weapons which they could use against America today." — Congressional Record - House 16 May 2001 page 8243
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me see here:

 

 

Expensive? Check.

 

Effective? Nope.

 

Public oversight? None.

 

Legal oversight? None.

 

Secretive? Well duh.

 

Will cost billions more over the coming years? You bet.

 

 

Seriously, investing on colonizing the Moon and then Mars would be a far better investment.

 

Those bodies would at least have resources.

 

But hey, while we are pissing away billions on an ineffective anti-missile defense system did you hear that the Blackhawks won the Stanley Cup? Pretty cool huh?

 

-NW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TRW continues to make Billions of dollars on a product that doesn't work?

 

What's the problem?

 

Several Senators and Congressmen are being funded(READ BRIBED) by them, that is what's important

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...