• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Remember those "Star Wars" critics?

Econ101

Well-known member
I am not familiar with this particular test but I do know that previous tests were set up and not real tests at all.

I have a friend who oversees some of the missile defense contractors and will ask him next time I see him on thier current progress. My cousin who was in the military and now writes programs for satelites may also have some more info. on this. I hope it is true.

We need real progress when it comes to missile defense but up to this point, it has not been there.

Technology is getting better and better every day though.

You can put missiles into two broad categories. One is the kind of missile that is usually shorter range (although we have some longer range ones) that cruise just above the earth, and the other is kind that is long range and gets sent on a trajectory that goes into space briefly and then falls down to the target on earth. The article claims success in the latter, not the former as I read it. The system is not even deployed right now, but is supposed to be in the fall.

Although many ships have the capability of defending themselves from missile attack and pretty much know the vulnerabilities and distance requirements for protection, they are usually limited to a very defined small area when it comes to defending against the shorter range missiles and this usually assumes no missile avoidence technology but rather a straight shot.

This is not my area of expertise but I will try to check up on it.

It would be great if Japan could have a reliable missile defense instead of having to go nuclear. I don't think it is that reliable up to now for type of missiles N. Korea is maybe developing and nothing will prevent an attack on Seoul S. Korea given the close proximity to the border.
 

Frankk

Well-known member
Brad S said:
Frank, you must not have meant "chicken Hawk" as a slurred referance to Jayhawks from the bloody Kansas days of slaver raids into Kansas, sometimes led by Quantrell. I sorta make that connection when I see a person from Mahsourah wielding one of their stock slurs.

The chicken hawks I refered to are the men who when it was there turn to serve in the miltary during war time were "chickens" but now that it's someone else's child serving they are "hawks"
 

Brad S

Well-known member
It would be great if Japan could have a reliable missile defense instead of having to go nuclear. I don't think it is that reliable up to now for type of missiles N. Korea is maybe developing and nothing will prevent an attack on Seoul S. Korea given the close proximity to the border.

If we're ever protected by such defense, will all the carpers, driven by polarized politics ever eat their crow? of course not. THey'll spin another lie. Just like I never heard any lefty saying those budget estimates are too low before we had some good news. I say even without the fruition of MDS, the opportunity for expanding tech is a worthy consideration never addressed by the carping left. I'm not buying the left is so stupid they can't see the benefits so I must conclude the left would rather demogogue an isue than increase our safety.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Brad S said:
It would be great if Japan could have a reliable missile defense instead of having to go nuclear. I don't think it is that reliable up to now for type of missiles N. Korea is maybe developing and nothing will prevent an attack on Seoul S. Korea given the close proximity to the border.

If we're ever protected by such defense, will all the carpers, driven by polarized politics ever eat their crow? of course not. THey'll spin another lie. Just like I never heard any lefty saying those budget estimates are too low before we had some good news. I say even without the fruition of MDS, the opportunity for expanding tech is a worthy consideration never addressed by the carping left. I'm not buying the left is so stupid they can't see the benefits so I must conclude the left would rather demogogue an isue than increase our safety.

Some of us would like to see more results with the money that has been spent. Same thing on the space shuttle. You might like to just spend money willy nilly but it comes a little harder around my house.
 

Brad S

Well-known member
Sure, your post is definitive. Criticize against some unknowable perfection. Ofcourse I want more with the money. Hell, I demand a transporter with the next $50. Your carping just sucks - There must be better lefty carpers than you.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Brad S said:
Sure, your post is definitive. Criticize against some unknowable perfection. Ofcourse I want more with the money. Hell, I demand a transporter with the next $50. Your carping just sucks - There must be better lefty carpers than you.

Unknowable perfection? You seem a little crazy here to me. I supported "star wars" spending. RR helped spend the communists out of western Russia. It was some of the best money spent and not used.

I merely pointed out that the "star wars" results have been disappointing and I wouldn't bet on those results for the sole security of the U.S. when it comes to missiles from Korea or anyone else.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Brad S said:
It would be great if Japan could have a reliable missile defense instead of having to go nuclear. I don't think it is that reliable up to now for type of missiles N. Korea is maybe developing and nothing will prevent an attack on Seoul S. Korea given the close proximity to the border.

If we're ever protected by such defense, will all the carpers, driven by polarized politics ever eat their crow? of course not. THey'll spin another lie. Just like I never heard any lefty saying those budget estimates are too low before we had some good news. I say even without the fruition of MDS, the opportunity for expanding tech is a worthy consideration never addressed by the carping left. I'm not buying the left is so stupid they can't see the benefits so I must conclude the left would rather demogogue an isue than increase our safety.

lets see........ on the budget deficit:

July 13, 2006, 8:12PM
Fuzzy math
Slight decrease in the projected federal budget deficit offers little cause for celebration.

Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle

SUPPOSE a physician infected 100 patients with malaria and subsequently cured seven of them. The healthy patients might be a testament to the doctor's restorative powers, but the entire exercise would not be edifying or praiseworthy.

A similar logic applies to claims about the wisdom to be seen in federal tax and spending decisions.
Click to learn more...

The federal budget deficit for fiscal 2005 was $318 billion. The White House projects that the deficit for 2006 will be $296 billion. Given the unrestrained spending that has characterized this Congress, Americans must be grateful the deficit is projected to be no higher. However, $296 billion, the fourth-highest deficit recorded in U.S. history, provides little cause to break open the champagne (or freedom wine, according to taste).

To its credit, the Republican Party's conservative base has begun to express outrage at Washington's irresponsible spending policies. Terrified of losing their base, President Bush and Republican leaders in Congress have seized upon the deficit figures as proof that they represent the party of fiscal responsibility. The lower deficit projection, Bush and House Majority Leader John Boehner say, results from tax cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003.

Voters, aware that the 2007 deficit is due to rise again to $318 billion, can decide how much credence to give that claim when they go to the polls in November. Whatever the case, the reduced budget figure for 2006 deserves to be seen in context.

In 2001, before the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the federal budget was in surplus. After the 2001 tax cuts and economic shock from 9/11, tax revenues declined in 2002-2003. Only in 2006 have tax revenues, adjusted for inflation and population growth, climbed higher than they were in 2000.

The truth is that when the United States' huge economy is healthy, tax revenues rise whether tax rates are raised, lowered or kept the same. Revenues rose when Ronald Reagan won tax cuts, and they rose when Bill Clinton secured tax hikes.

Tax cuts do spur economic activity and can help to lift the economy out of recession. But the administration's own Treasury Department analysis finds that tax cuts account for less than half of 1 percent of the economy's 3 percent-4 percent annual growth.

If tax cuts are spurring an economic boom, why is the federal budget still running a huge deficit after four years of solid economic expansion? The budget ought to be in surplus.

Furthermore, the budget figures do not take into account the hundreds of billions of dollars the nation will spend fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. Following long custom, the administration has budgeted not a single dollar to pay for future combat operations, even in the middle of a global struggle against determined enemies.

As both Republicans and Democrats acknowledge, this year's $294 billion deficit estimate should be $180 billion higher to reflect the spending of every penny of the annual Social Security surplus the government collects from U.S. workers. That money should be used to buy down the national debt to prepare for the wave of baby boomer retirements, not squandered on bridges to nowhere and other so-called budget earmarks.

Democrats in Congress have their own large spending ambitions, but they have no hand in crafting the budget and are not even given a chance to read appropriations bills before a vote is taken.

In the last five years, federal spending has added $3 trillion to the national debt. Placed against that backdrop, a $12 billion drop in the federal deficit deserves no more than a polite nod of recognition

I wouldn't be bragging about this one too much because when you look at the facts, there is not much to brag about.

Dems were known as tax and spend, repubs. are becoming known as spend and borrow.

Clinton stepped out of the pattern but GW added to it.
 

Latest posts

Top