Scrap Trident ICBM program?

[Saytan]

For those who say we don't need them - I ask you one question. Why is there no piracy in the English Channel?

there's no piracy in the english channel because it's surrounded by countries with effective and mandated governments.

 

[platinum87]

4 minutes at best is warning time, ..

where do you get this figure..

and more importantly, where is the missle detected, on launch? in space?

 

[Tefal]

where are the figures

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Missile_Defense

If you can be ****ed finding the cost of those programs and adjusting for inflation be my guest.

But considering they have spent over $5.8 trillion on the weapons, and the proposed system is planed to cost 1.2 trillion. Yeah it;s a safe bet that it;s over a trillion dollars in the past 50 years.

 

[Tefal]

where do you get this figure..

and more importantly, where is the missle detected, on launch? in space?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_minute_warning

 

[Sankari]

There's nowt wrong with our Tefal that a swift kick in the nadgers wouldn't fix!

 

[Sankari]

Sorry, wrong thread.

But my point is still valid.

 

[semi-pro waster]

Not really, especially for America, who since the ss-18 lost a reliable second strike option. (partly why they needed the early warning system as tier silos wouldn't survive) So they need somthing to protect them.

We're in a rather different position to America though, one or two nukes bypassing our defences would render most of the UK rather toasty for the next 10,000 odd years, one or two nukes bypassing America's missile defence system leaves a good 90% of the land relatively fine. We've got a much smaller landmass but comparatively speaking many times more people on it, we're also not as in debt as America (and committed to armament) although we're disappointingly not that far off either.

edit: you havent considered people like me, even if i knew i couldnt win the war, i would nuke the enemy city, even if i knew they would inflict 10x more damage. just to see the world in flames! Missle defense is required, the americans spend like 8.3 billion $ on missle defense, which is biggest single project.

I had considered people who take your stated position, I was just discounting them as hopefully they'll never get into any position of power because, and I mean this in the nicest possible way, if they do then I reckon we're already in a pretty dodgy position.

 

[Jono8]

well sending 100 nukes to cover many areas of the uk, stopping any of them is better than nothing.. you would save a lot of lives.

secondly there is already developed missle defense systems that are extremely effective, laser beams that shoot missles and using missles aswell that intercept... stopping an ICBM is not that hard at all.. stopping 500 at the same time is hard, thats what i think money should be spent on.

and i recon stoping a single nuke is better than not, spared civilians who can now fight in the war!

edit: you havent considered people like me, even if i knew i couldnt win the war, i would nuke the enemy city, even if i knew they would inflict 10x more damage. just to see the world in flames! Missle defense is required, the americans spend like 8.3 billion $ on missle defense, which is biggest single project.




check this out.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_missile_defense



way to debate,



i could kill you now, well that make it easier?

What you said was so retarded, it wasnt worth debating.