Canada opts out of missile defense

[DreamTone7]

...BTW bitwhys...your second post makes too many assumptions, some of which I know are false, to allow you to draw any logical conclusions. Methinks you have been reading more anti-American books again.



I can't say all that I know, but I can say that we have satellites that can read the back of a matchbook cover...much less watch closely any IBM sites (which would be watched 24/7, of course). We would know within seconds if anything capable of reaching the US is launched. ICBMs are always most vulnerable in their boost phase, before they reach even Mach 1...not hard at all to pick them off then. In the not too distant future, it might even be possible to pick them off before the ICBM even finishes clearing its silo. Do you really think you know everything that a top-secret system is capable of? Do you really think you know all that there is to know about it? I can almost guarantee that the answer to both of those question is a resounding "NO"...as evidenced by your post. Assuming, of course, that your post is not just another peice of propaganda itself.

Melody and Instruments for the soul...

[bitwhys]

you don't even know where the hell they are let alone what the flight path is going to be.

[bitwhys]

almost forgot. Not being fond of organized religion, I'm not a big fan of Pax Americana.

[ans]

"That makes you a neo-con internet propagandist.."



No it doesn't. It makes you a doody-head. I read it.



"Todd's book is still being translated and put on bookshelves"



So? If my suspicions are correct (and we know they are)Russky Joe and Natasha and Real Professor and Steppy and Q and Antman and Conal Rehill and the rest are well aware that just as record companies can successfully market dreck because many folks are oblivious to tone, a similar phenomenon (obliviousness to truth) could certainly account for Mr. Todd's book still being 'put on bookshelves'.



re "blah blah blah a more stable anthropological base than America - centuries of egalitarian families rather than Anglo-American primogeniture has given them a 'loyal sibling' mind-set built for sacrifice and solidarity blah blah blah"



No, it isn't. No, it hasn't. "Primogeniture" indeed. Being intentionally vacuous is counter productive



re letting go of bitterness. I've heard that unhealed bitterness leads to baldness. Try yoga. It's the antidote to bitterness



Peace To You, Brotha

[bitwhys]

so dreamtone. let me get this straight. satellites, when their operators aren't busy getting phone numbers off of matchbooks detect a ICBM launch and an interceptor missile not only launches from Alaska in time, but manages to cross the Pacific and pluck that bad-boy out of mid air before it even reaches Mach 1. wow. must be using a hemi.







sounds like crazy talk to me.

[DreamTone7]

bitwhys - That's not what I said. You're assuming again.



Think about it a bit. If satellites can read a matchbook cover, they can certainly detect the building of a somewhat larger facility used to house ICBMs. (We will know where they are at...just as we do all ex-Soviet sites.) Satellites can also detect light spectrums other than visual...we could (and can) detect when a liquid-fueled ICBM was being fuled up (as it has to be before launch...because even the Russians weren't stupid enough to leave it fueled at all times) hours before it could ever be launched. The process of fueling takes several hours...a lot can happen in a few hours. The technology to create a solid-propellant ICBM that has any possibility of reaching its target is far beyond most countries...the Russians only aquired it towards the end of the Cold War. There are very few countries that have it.



Then there is the matter of guidance systems. The Soviets themselves never really licked this one...and they knew it. That's why while American rockets' warheads could be measured in kilotons of output, while Russian warheads had to be measured in megatons. They knew they couldn't hit what they were aiming for, so they made up for it by increasing the size of the warhead. Now we're supposed to believe that North Korea has this capability? Methinks not.



There is one key piece of non-secret info that I have intentionally left out. Let's see if you can figure out what it is....



Why do you think "the war in space" is a subject of conversation at all? Satellites are key to the success of the whole scenario.

[bitwhys]

Quote:

---

bitwhys - That's not what I said. You're assuming again.

---

really??? then this...

Quote:

---

We would know within seconds if anything capable of reaching the US is launched. ICBMs are always most vulnerable in their boost phase, before they reach even Mach 1...not hard at all to pick them off then.

---

must have been the other Dreamtone7

Quote:

---

There is one key piece of non-secret info that I have intentionally left out.

---

some semblance of fact comes to mind. a 250 second burn time during boost phase and the need to be within 1000 km downrange before it starts bussing comes to mind



the fact your full of @#%$ and not even close to discussing what Canada was being asked to participate in is another possibility.



I think I'll go with "you're full of @#%$".



and you're REALLY dreaming if you think North Korea is going to play nice and use an ICBM delivery system.

[DreamTone7]

I see you have chosen to react emotionally instead of intellectually. OK...it's the submarine. With its nukes...or even cruise missiles for that matter...it could, with satellite warning, take out anything the North Koreans could choose to point at us long before it ever left the launching pad. And those "boomers", as they are called, are on station 24/7...and are trained to get off missiles in a matter of minutes.



So...what is this missile systems Canada doesn't want really all about? I have my suspicions, though I can't say for sure. Is it a smokescreen of somekind for something else? Possibly. America has successfully intercepted and destroyed supersonic aircraft with lasers fired from a specially equiped Boeing 747. Putting lasers on a ground station for similar use against ICBMs isn't too far a stretch at all. But this is only one possibility. Lasers fired from a satellite itself are another option...but I don't think we've solved the power supply problem yet (and that would also not be a reason to set up bases all over the place). Let's also not forget that the government has to give the ravenous dogs (the media) something "for them to poop on" while it carries on with other projects nicely and quietly. Could the new missile system be merely a psychological deterrant? That's a possibility too...though an expensive one. But then again, how do any of us know what the money is really being spent on? Because the media tells us? How in the world would they know? Let's face it...there is potentially much more going on here than meets the eye...at least the media eye. I'm in a "let's wait and see what this is really all about" mode.

Melody and Instruments for the soul...

[bitwhys]

Quote:

---

I see you have chosen to react emotionally instead of intellectually

---

you and your townhall tripe. "you're full of @#%$" isn't emotional. its accurate.

Quote:

---

So...what is this missile systems Canada doesn't want really all about? I have my suspicions, though I can't say for sure

---

let's add "you're a moron" to that.



here



pictures and everything.

Edited by: bitwhys at: 3/2/05 4:46

[bitwhys]

land here



and you're still a moron.

[DreamTone7]

Bitwhys...I see you believe everything you see on the internet. Sorry to see that. In the future, try looking beyond the borders of your own country for a more global picture...in more ways than one.

[bitwhys]

[russky natasha]

American missile technology!! Remember the Mars probe?



"Base to Buzz Lightyear! You're OK, you're 100 metres off that Martian Mountain ....... hang on, or was that 100 feet ....... "



CRASH!! BOOM!!







Sophisticated computer technology? The geeks can't even get the bugs out of Windows XP service pack 2, never mind hit a frickin' wobbly rocket coming down in a vertical dive at Mach 10!!



You all live in a crazy dream world, ya frickin' idiots.



..... the boss is gonna KILL me if he sees this .... I couldn't resist it. What a bunch of frickin' dorks, and heavily armed dangerous dorks at that.

[bitwhys]

Quote:

---

wobbly rocket

---

bingo



Putin's remarks about eratic patterns were not make believe. Even in GW I the scuds were designed to freefall sporatically to make them harder to hit which was one of the reasons a successful Patriot stike made the papers every time it happened.



besides, the geography is wrong. any interceptor launched from Alaska (that WAS and IS the plan, no rockets on Canadian soil) flying over Canadian airspace would be CHASING the ICBM, which would be ludicrous especially since it would be in (random) freefall at that point. my guess, and its only a guess, is that the part we haven't heard about is Uncle Sam wanted air-to-air capability within Canadian boundaries.



well he can shove that, too.

Edited by: bitwhys at: 3/2/05 20:57

[DreamTone7]

"...that WAS and IS the plan..."



According to who? President Bitwhys? As I said, you do seem to believe everything you read on the internet...or perhaps at this point I should say, everything you WANT to believe.



Again, patience...we will see. Bear in mind that ballistic missiles can't wobble in their flight path and expect to hit their targets...which is perhaps the excuse Russia used to keep megaton-range warheads on their ICBMs. These kind of claims like "we meant to make our missiles wobble" don't buy too much credibility with me. (As in "...I meant to do that!") It's called "poor guidance systems". But you can't "wobble" away from a laser...whether the "wobble" is intentional or not.



*Wobbling rockets*