Stretching the bounds of scientific feasibility to their breaking point

[ivolsky]

Star Wars missile defense is more fiction than science. The program's "boost-phase," has failed a test to target and fire at enemy missiles just after they're launched. The "boost phase," designed to be the first "layer" of defense, against North Korea and Iran, fires rockets at enemy missiles just after launch, when they are most vulnerable.

While the midcourse missile failed a test Dec. 15, the boost phase "would press the far edge of what is physically possible in an antimissile system," according to a report by the Congressional Budget Office. A few weeks ago, the Pentagon said it wouldn't be able to deploy existing pieces of the $50 billion project on schedule because it hadn't been completely tested.

Philip Coyle, who headed the Pentagon's testing office during the Clinton administration, said the design of the boost-phase system was buckling under its own complexity. "The analysis confirmed that boost-phase missile defense isn't practicable," Coyle said. "You can't fool mother nature."

Today's missile defense program was inspired by Ronald Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative, a plan to shield the nation against a nuclear attack. The program languished, partly over concerns it would violate the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (which banned nationwide missile defense systems).

After Bush withdrew from the treaty in 2002, Missile Defense was re-budgeted at $50 billion over the next five years, but its construction, deployment and maintenance could cost several times that.

The system has its critics. Many experts believe that missile defense is a "needlessly costly and complicated system for a threat that could, for example, be more easily neutralized with preemptive strikes." Further, the program's technology has not yet been developed. To shoot down a missile launched from Iran for example, up to 7 interceptor batteries would be needed in Iraq, Turkmenistan and the Gulf of Oman. According to the Congressional Budget Office to intercept a missile from Iran or North Korea, interceptors would have to travel up to 22,000 mph, beyond today's technology.

Accuracy is also a problem. In the Iraq war, Patriot missiles mistakenly downed 2 coalition aircraft. For the boost phase of missile defense, an error of a couple of feet over hundreds of miles traveled to the target could land the missile in another continent.

A year ago, Northrop Grumman won a $4.5-billion contract to develop the boost-phase of missile defense. Northrop Grumman is the second-biggest U.S. defense contractor. In 2003, Northop spent $343,000 (55% to Republicans) on campaign contributions and $6.5 million on lobbying. Robert Helm, Northrop Grumman's vice president of government relations, served as assistant secretary of defense in the late 80s. Prior to that appointment, he worked as a senior defense analyst for the Senate Appropriations Committee.

more: www.politicalthought.net

[FloridaPat]

1. "you can't change the laws of physics, captain" is the correct phrase.

Before * stole the White House, the tests of this fiscal fisaco were faked. The missle had a trasmitter in it to let the defense part find it. I doubt seriously anyone who would send a missle at us would put in a transmitter.

But I think the real defense of this is the defense contractors. Peace can be a real bitch. And with unemployment up, they would be really had put to find jobs creating war weapons should peace come upon the land. Just like computer programming jobs!

[NYC]

2. $4.5 miilion for something that doesn't work (boost phase),

and that's just the beginning. I'm sure they'll receive a lot more money to continue working on the boost phase.

Make a small donation (approx. $250,000) and reap endless rewards.

[Wonk]

4. Billion, with a B. That's some serious pork. nt

[NYC]

5. Oops. I meant billion. I'm just not accustomed to such

large sums being spent on unusable items right under our noses, just to benefit the rich.

[Silverhair]

3. Nov. 2004 issue of Scientific American has good article.

Title of Article:

"Holes in the Missile Shield
The national missile defense now being deployed by the U.S. should be replaced with a more effective system"


"This fall, perhaps by the time you read this, President George W. Bush is expected to declare that the first phase of the long-awaited national missile defense is operational. The Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency (MDA) plans to install six interceptor rockets--designed to strike a ballistic missile in midcourse--in silos at Fort Greely in Alaska by mid-October. Ten more will be deployed at Fort Greely and four more at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California by the end of 2005. Over the following years the MDA intends to bolster this rudimentary midcourse defense with more interceptors, advanced radars and surveillance satellites. The reason for the deployment is to counter the threat that a rogue state--namely, North Korea or Iran--will attempt to hit the U.S. with nuclear or biological weapons delivered on intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs).
But despite the more than $80 billion spent by the U.S. on missile defense since 1985, this system will not provide significant protection for many years, if ever. The political pressure to claim that the U.S. is secure against a rogue nation's attack has led to a defense that will not counter even the earliest threats from the emerging missile powers. The MDA's midcourse system is built to intercept long-range missiles fired thousands of kilometers from the U.S.; it can do nothing to stop a short- or medium-range missile launched from a ship off America's coasts. What is more, the interceptor rockets would most likely prove inadequate against long-range missiles as well, because an enemy could easily equip its ICBMs with fundamentally simple and highly effective countermeasures."

Rest of Arcticle at:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=1&articleID=000A45A2-E044-115D-A04483414B7F0000

[IHeart1993]

6. meanwhile, Global Warming is a reality

eom