View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
DreamTone7
Joined: 20 Sep 2002 Posts: 2571
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
bitwhys
Joined: 19 Nov 2004 Posts: 649
|
Posted: Tue Mar 01, 2005 11:29 pm Post subject: Re: re |
|
|
you don't even know where the hell they are let alone what the flight path is going to be.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
bitwhys
Joined: 19 Nov 2004 Posts: 649
|
Posted: Tue Mar 01, 2005 11:44 pm Post subject: Re: re |
|
|
almost forgot. Not being fond of organized religion, I'm not a big fan of Pax Americana.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
ans
Joined: 15 Feb 2005 Posts: 441
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
bitwhys
Joined: 19 Nov 2004 Posts: 649
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
DreamTone7
Joined: 20 Sep 2002 Posts: 2571
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
bitwhys
Joined: 19 Nov 2004 Posts: 649
|
Posted: Wed Mar 02, 2005 3:45 am Post subject: Re: re |
|
|
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.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
DreamTone7
Joined: 20 Sep 2002 Posts: 2571
|
Posted: Wed Mar 02, 2005 4:12 am Post subject: Re: re |
|
|
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... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
bitwhys
Joined: 19 Nov 2004 Posts: 649
|
Posted: Wed Mar 02, 2005 4:42 am Post subject: Re: re |
|
|
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
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
bitwhys
Joined: 19 Nov 2004 Posts: 649
|
Posted: Wed Mar 02, 2005 4:45 am Post subject: Re: re |
|
|
land here
and you're still a moron.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
DreamTone7
Joined: 20 Sep 2002 Posts: 2571
|
Posted: Wed Mar 02, 2005 1:54 pm Post subject: re |
|
|
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.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
bitwhys
Joined: 19 Nov 2004 Posts: 649
|
Posted: Wed Mar 02, 2005 2:34 pm Post subject: Re: re |
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
russky natasha
Joined: 28 Feb 2005 Posts: 19
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
bitwhys
Joined: 19 Nov 2004 Posts: 649
|
Posted: Wed Mar 02, 2005 8:57 pm Post subject: Re: yankee rocket men |
|
|
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
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
DreamTone7
Joined: 20 Sep 2002 Posts: 2571
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|