wolf_brother
Banned
Which is a different situation altogether, and we both know it. Come back when CIWS stops an ICBM in low orbit and we'll talk.
Very well, two more relevant links:Which is a different situation altogether...
Much to the horror of most of Reagan's staff (and most conservatives, at the time) he not only agreed with Gorbachev on nuclear disarmament but he actually offered to share Star Wars, as a joint American-Russian missile shield program.
Electric Monk said:There are multiple potential PODs.
Electric Monk said:The easiest, in one sense, is that the KGB or GRU has a mole in the SDI program and they learn (and tell Gorbachev, which is a 50/50 kinda thing) that Star Wars is a joke. Therefore Gorbachev doesn't really care if Reagan actually shares SDI technology with the USSR and accepts the deal.
Electric Monk said:Both men, for different reasons, truly did want to step out of the nuclear missile race. I think it's probably too late for the USSR to survive, but maybe the prestige lets Gorbachev bring Russia to a Chinese-style reform without the American economic advisors that screwed Russia in the '90s. That'd be a great outcome for hundreds of millions of Russians.
Electric Monk said:Perhaps, too, the USA under Reagan might be able to cut defence strongly enough (and under a Republican) that the idea of the inviolate defence budget is trashed, which would do good things to the US balance sheet.
Aegis isn't effective against ICBMs.
Patriot isn't effective against ICBMs.
Again, contact me when you can shoot down a missile packing a nuclear payload in low orbit.
The capability has been there for more than 40 years.
http://www.nuclearabms.info/index.html
http://www.srmsc.org/
http://warfare.ru/?linkid=2205&catid=315
http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/v1000.htm
MIRV's are no harder to knock out in the reentry phase than anything else, there just tend to be more warheads on differing trajectories, which means you need more interceptors. You cant manouver a warhead once it hits atmosphere.
You are aware of MARVs, right? Or, for that matter, the Space Shuttle? Dyna-Soar? You know, reentry vehicles (which could transport warheads) that were perfectly capable of maneuvering once they hit atmosphere? There's no reason you couldn't do the same with an ICBM (or SLBM) lofted RV carrying a nuclear warhead. Which, BTW, was actually viewed as the "next step" past simple MIRVing OTL.
Then again, why would we want him to? I mean, what happens if Reagan lets up on the pressure against the Soviet Union? Odds are, they survive longer. Do we really think that's a good thing?
I second that opinion...the purpose of the thread was not to discuss merits and feasability of each single ABM system
Could a successful summit have led to a coup in Moscow?