• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

If United Europe Went to War With The U.S.A

I think, Pentagon plans is for a multi-layered missle defense. If the Pentagon is smart, they will include the space based elements of Brilliant Pebbles as one part of that layer.
 
The DOD has said that a space-based missile defense system will be under way in 2008. The APS assesed the data from the simulations and tests of such a system and concluded that it would not be cost-effective and would not be very successful in a real missile attack in the forseeable future. We simply do not have the technology to create an effective missile defence shield. It's all in the report I provided a link to.
 
Napoleon's Nightingale said:
Nope. The current program is based on trying to take out the missiles as they are launched
Thats ONE of the parts of the system, the boost phase interceptor.
The GBI/EKV system hits the incoming missiles after apogee.

but because most have the solid fuel technology which have a longer burn time it has been assesed that the interceptor missiles could not be launched in time to intercept the target because interception is currently dependant on the shorter burn time of liquid fuel missiles.
There must be somthing qrong with your assessment, because the boost-phase interceptors are 100% in testing.
 
TimmyBoy said:
It's true, the Soviet Union was having serious economic troubles beforehand. Under Brezhnev they were having problems and they sought an agreement with Carter on nuclear arms to alleviate some of the pressure that continued military competition with US was having on their economy. But the continued expanisionist programs of the Soviet Union and their gains in the Third World helped to bring about the election of Reagan and I believe it was the policies of the Reagan Adminstration that brought about an accelerated collapse of the Soviet Union. I might even argue, that if Reagan never came to power, the Soviet Union might have never collapsed or at least still be around today.
It just amazes me how many Americans credit Reagun with having brought about the collapse of the Soviet Union, as if Gorbachov had nothing to do with it !
The truth is Gorbachov's policies of glasnost & perestroika had somewhat more to do with it.
Reagun with his hawkish, nationalistic, confrontational attitude, along with his lack of education & intelligence, was the antithesis of Gorbachov.
The fact that Reagun was controlled his sponsors the defence contractors, lead to the Reyjavic arms limitation talks collapsing over SDI.
I believe there is a thread that asks... "Are Americans arrogant ?"
Perhaps a kinder way to phrase the questions would be... "Are many Americans naive ?".
The answer is in the affirmative.
 
Last edited:
M14 Shooter said:
The EU would come off second-best in a fight with the United States.

Anyone agree? Disagree?
Discuss.


We will have no need to fight you as long as you keep your sorry arses off our territory.
Ignoring your existence will be sufficient for us.
 
Aryan Imperium said:
We will have no need to fight you as long as you keep your sorry arses off our territory.
Ignoring your existence will be sufficient for us.

Thats probably the most non-answering of the non-answer answers.
Congrats.
 
M14 Shooter said:
The EU would come off second-best in a fight with the United States.

Anyone agree? Disagree?
Discuss.
It would be MAD for two nuclear powers, America & the EU to go to war with each other ?
By 'MAD' I mean mutually assured destruction.
Would you like to fight in a war M14 ?
 
M14 Shooter said:
Thats probably the most non-answering of the non-answer answers.
Congrats.

The winner would be he who always wins when coutries go to war against each other>figure it out!
 
M14 Shooter said:
The EU would come off second-best in a fight with the United States.

Anyone agree? Disagree?
Discuss.
arent the US and EU already at war? just not officially
 
robin said:
It would be MAD for two nuclear powers, America & the EU to go to war with each other ?
By 'MAD' I mean mutually assured destruction.
Not so much.
The EU (read: French and UK) arsenal isnt anywhere near as large as the US, and their only effective delivery platform is their SSBNs.
In an exchange, assuming the US did not first find and kill the EU boomers, the US would be hurt, and the EU would cease to exist.

This is why the 'war' wuld not go nuclear.

Would you like to fight in a war M14 ?
What makes you think I haven't?
 
M14 Shooter said:
What makes you think I haven't?
Yeah true, uze seem kaand ah tuff boy ain't ya, U rrrr real man eh ? :lol:
 
robin said:
Yeah true, uze seem kaand ah tuff boy ain't ya, U rrrr real man eh ? :lol:

I'll make you a guarantee:
I've had more bullets whiz within inches of my head than you have.
 
M14 Shooter said:
I'll make you a guarantee:
I've had more bullets whiz within inches of my head than you have.
So which one of us do you think that makes the smartest then ? :lol:
 
robin said:
So which one of us do you think that makes the smartest then ? :lol:

I'm pretty confident in my judgement as to who is smarter, and it doesnt have anything to do with bullets.
 
M14 Shooter said:
Thats ONE of the parts of the system, the boost phase interceptor.
The GBI/EKV system hits the incoming missiles after apogee.


There must be somthing qrong with your assessment, because the boost-phase interceptors are 100% in testing.


There's nothing wrong with the assesement but there's something wrong with the DOD. They asked the APS to analyze the data and reach a conclusion on how likely the programs are to be successful. The APS has some of the most brilliant minds in the world yet the DOD chose to ignore them because they didn't get the answer they wanted to hear. In my opinion the MDI is nothing more than a colossal waste of money thats being used as a scare tactic in an elaborate facade to make the U.S. look invincible when in fact the system has less then nominal positive results. I sudgest you read the report.
 
Napoleon's Nightingale said:
There's nothing wrong with the assesement...
Wait. Something is wrong here.
You argue that the current BPI system canl;t be effective because the SRBs dont provide enough impulse.

But yet, all the BPI system tests, including those that involve intercepts, have been successful.

How can that be?

In my opinion the MDI is nothing more than a colossal waste of money thats being used as a scare tactic in an elaborate facade to make the U.S. look invincible

1- Would it be better to save the money and let Portland get hit by a nuke?
2- Scam? Fascade? The US doesnt face a IRCM threat?

And you're proceeding under a false premise -- the NMD system isnt designerd to make us look invicible, its designed to keep missiles from hittin our cities.

when in fact the system has less then nominal positive results. I sudgest you read the report
Please:
Specify these 'less than nominal positive results'.
 
George_Washington said:
The only way a war like this could happen is if one of us develops a defense against all nuclear attacks. If that were to happen, history would quickly revert itself and the wars of old would once again be upon us. We just might actually develop a fool proof defense to nuclear attack some day.

You're right ... particularly if everyone goes around with a "premptive" strategy.
 
Iriemon said:
You're right ... particularly if everyone goes around with a "premptive" strategy.

Well, hey, you know, somebody has to be the Billy Bad Ass or go in and John Wayne it.
 
M14 Shooter said:
Wait. Something is wrong here.
You argue that the current BPI system canl;t be effective because the SRBs dont provide enough impulse.

But yet, all the BPI system tests, including those that involve intercepts, have been successful.

How can that be?



1- Would it be better to save the money and let Portland get hit by a nuke?
2- Scam? Fascade? The US doesnt face a IRCM threat?

And you're proceeding under a false premise -- the NMD system isnt designerd to make us look invicible, its designed to keep missiles from hittin our cities.


Please:
Specify these 'less than nominal positive results'.


Why don't you acctually READ the report I sent a link to. That was the purpose of providing the link.
 
I definately agree, that the US needs a missle defense system.
 
Napoleon's Nightingale said:
Why don't you acctually READ the report I sent a link to. That was the purpose of providing the link.

Oh yes - I'll just page throug all 300+ pages and glean the answers to my questions.

OR... since you apparently have read it, why dont YOU just answer them.
 
M14 Shooter said:
Oh yes - I'll just page throug all 300+ pages and glean the answers to my questions.

OR... since you apparently have read it, why dont YOU just answer them.

I already have. Perhaps you don't know what a Final Conclusion section is.
 
Napoleon's Nightingale said:
I already have. Perhaps you don't know what a Final Conclusion section is.

OK then,sparky - answer my questions.
Perhaps you dont know what an asnwer is?
 
TimmyBoy said:
Well, hey, you know, somebody has to be the Billy Bad Ass or go in and John Wayne it.

You suppose with Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, and Hirohito gone, we needed to step into the role?
 
Iriemon said:
You suppose with Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, and Hirohito gone, we needed to step into the role?

Don;t kid yourself:
If the US ever decided to do that, most of the world would be under our control, and that which is not would be in flames.
 
Back
Top Bottom