Topic: Missle "Defense" System. I mean c'mon.
started by: solid
I'm pissed and worried.
this is crap. he should put more funding into the energy crisis. finding new and better and cleaner ways of producing energy
can you say fusion?
------------------
...when you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks into you
-- Friedrich Nietzsche
------------------
They have cats in the future?
I'm not sure on the exact time, but if some crazy pakistani terrorists got their hands on some nukes and ballistic missiles and decided to lob one across the pacific at us, we would only have like 15 minutes before it hit. In a case like this, I think I would rather have one missile defense system for the entire country than 100s of soldiers, tanks, bombers and subs just for myself.
quote:
Originally posted by Rhydant:
can you say fusion?
Can you say BOOOOM?
------------------
Decaffinated coffee is like unleaded fuel, it tastes like shit.
However, how would you all feel if China built a missile defense system? It would seem quite a bit threatening. It would destroy half of the mutually assured destruction agreement, like we had with USSR. It may be a defensive weapon, and you can view it as such when you're the one being defended. However, when the other side has it, plus enough offensive capability to destroy you, it feels very threatening. I can see where it has it's problem in the real world.
quote:
Originally posted by L33T_h4x0r_d00d:
Can you say BOOOOM?
um...a fusion reactor can't "go boooom". all that's there is really hot plasma circling around. if it escaped, it would cool so fast that the only damage would be to the reactor itself.
A missile defence will only create an arms race. China will make more nukes and our system will be worthless. The money would do a lot better in other areas.. Fusion for example heh
(can you tell I'm no good at writting focused paragraphes?)
This message has been edited by DeadAnztac on April 05, 2001 at 04:43 AM
------------------
It's the pop-o-matic bubble, motherfucker!
I like doing the chain reactions... BONUS POINTS!
And what if they get the kind of missles that split into 5 different ones! 
*BOOM* There's goes ANOTHER metropolis!! D'OH!
------------------
Have a nice day, because monkeys don't.
-< PersonGuy >
quote:
Originally posted by Sithiee:
wouldnt some sort of laser system be more intelligent?
HAHA. has anyone every played "warheads" or some variant? that little comment just made me laugh.. but i dont really have an opinion.
/me withdrawls into the darkness.
------------------
god has a HARD ON for marines - Full Metal Jacket
Go read Tom Clancy's Cardinal of the Kremlin. Sure it's fiction, but it's a good read about laser defense
later
-miNus
This can be used as an offensive system. I know you might think that "so what? i can just as well die from nukes fired from the ground too but im safe here.. so whats your point?" but that's not the point at all. Behind this, lies an arms race between other powerful countries trying to beat each other- and in the end you have one bad competition.
Not to mention how the US can easily "misfire" any missle when they want to. Think about how Iraq got bombed because those jets flew over (or was it too close?) to that zone. Seriously, you wouldn't think such an objective based government system like america sends out armed jets for nothing.
It can also start a nuclear war just as easily too. I just don't like anything george bush does. It outright scares me.
quote:
Originally posted by miNus:
Umm... Don't laugh Melkor, there have been laser systems that have been tested. Albeit, on a smaller scale. I read in one popular science article about a small ground based one that was being developed for use in Israel (I think) to defend against small, ground-hugging missles being fired at the Israelis from their enemies. It actually worked I think. Anyway, don't laugh at people when they have good ideas =P
Go read Tom Clancy's Cardinal of the Kremlin. Sure it's fiction, but it's a good read about laser defense :)later
-miNus
miNus,
During WWII, the Germans started trying to find enemy ships, aircraft and troops by swinging a pendulum over a map of the area where they believed the units to be.
Just because someone has a good IDEA, doesn't mean it will be at all practical.
------------------
What's in a name?
A rose by any other name would still smell as sweet -- William Shakespeare
quote:
Originally posted by solid:
No, no, no. I'm really sorry but most of you.. pretty much all of you (except askheaves) got the point.
Hey, why single me out? What did I do wrong? I didn't even take a side.
Funny, I hope that's a typo, because you are pretty much agreeing with the gist of my post. I agree that missile defense systems screw with the balance of an arms race. That's why the START treaties forbid it. We knew that a good defense was the only way to increase your cause when your offense is infinite.
There is, however, the issue of 'rogue nations' and 'terrorist groups' lobbing nuclear hardware toward our buddies or ourselves. It's a different story altogether.
Plus, Lasers rule.
quote:
Originally posted by Sithiee:
however we do have lasers,
Lasers?
Hell, why doesn't the USA go all the way and start testing with antimatter clusters?
(rhetorical statement in the form of a question)
(not meant to be answered)
------------------
What's in a name?
A rose by any other name would still smell as sweet -- William Shakespeare
This message has been edited by Dysorderia on April 05, 2001 at 07:10 PM
------------------
When my flying days are over, and my death has come to pass
I hope they bury me upside down, so the whole damn world can kiss my ass
quote:
Originally posted by CatKnight:
um...a fusion reactor can't "go boooom". all that's there is really hot plasma circling around. if it escaped, it would cool so fast that the only damage would be to the reactor itself.
cold fusion all the way
------------------
< http://www.pshosting.com/
>
fast and inexpensive web hosting and domain registration
------------------
I have yet to meet a C compiler that is more friendly and easier to use than eating soup with a knife.
quote:
Originally posted by askheaves:
Hey, why single me out? What did I do wrong? I didn't even take a side.
That's not the point. The reason I put this thing up was so I'd point out that a missle defense system can start an arms race, and it's rather threatning, at least to me and my homeland. And the US is the one always talking about less nuclear warheads being made and so forth.
And I was also gonna start mentioning the START treaties too.
in case you wanted to know, regular fusion plants (which have been built and do work somewhat) work by accelerating plasma of tritum and deuterium (isotopes of hydrogen) until they are at 10s of millions of degrees, at which point they fuse and create more energy. the plasma is kept in a magnetic field to prevent it from hitting the reactor wall (which would cool the plasma down, and melt the wall). these reactors are shaped like hollow donuts (toruses) and are called tokamaks (which i think is russian for torus).
as for the laser issue, US military HAS created a powerful laser that is mounted on a turret on the tip of a converted 747. I think the entire plane is filled with batteries to power the laser. anyway, it can shoot down missles effectively but it has to be relatively close, so timing wise it wouldn't do you much good.
edit: actually i think i read somewhere (i dont remember for sure) that it is possible to fuse helium at tempratures about 1*10^-7 kelvin (just above absolute zero) with lasers, you can't really get any energy out of it anyway.
edit2: for kai: the way they would do that form of cold fusion is by squishing atoms together by pushing on them from all sides with lasers. i dont know if this has actually been done yet though.
This message has been edited by CatKnight on April 05, 2001 at 10:04 PM
------------------
When my flying days are over, and my death has come to pass
I hope they bury me upside down, so the whole damn world can kiss my ass
This message has been edited by j0eSmith on April 05, 2001 at 11:06 PM
china views us as an opponent, an enemy. and china is a very, very patient adersary. remember sun tzu? one of the things he said, that is deeply ingrained in chinese philosophy is that the best position you can be in in a war is if your opponent doesn't know there is a war. if china thinks there will some day be a war, they will wait until they think they've got a good chance of winning it and let loose.
we have *got* to keep that in mind. or we get caught with our pants down and our hands on our ankles.
------------------
kuru
'dancing is the vertical expression of horizontal desire.'
-robert frost
They fucked up, but didn't realize it at first, and made 'crazy' demands.
They need a way out that won't piss off the most important trade partners they potentially have
They realize that they are holding hostage AMERICANS!!!!!
They frantically try to find a way to get out of this without pissing off Americans, and not losing face in front of China.
- Bush realizes that he has breathing room, and takes a softer line to ease their dilemna.
Next step, China gives back pilots, announces investigation is complete, apologizes for causing inconvenience, and sends personal home.
Don't know much else. I'm drinking.
Edit: Ah damn. Wrong thread. Must stop drinking.
This message has been edited by askheaves on April 05, 2001 at 11:40 PM
quote:
Originally posted by CatKnight:
in case you wanted to know, regular fusion plants (which have been built and do work somewhat) work by accelerating plasma of tritum and deuterium (isotopes of hydrogen) until they are at 10s of millions of degrees, at which point they fuse and create more energy. .
Close, They use a very large magnetic field and use this to compress the Hydrogen as far as it will go. This causes a temp increase. The rest of the reaction is set off by lasers. Once the reaction starts it will self sustain as long as the fields hold and the fuel is there. all you have to do is vent the He out of the reactor and straight into kiddie ballons. (ok, it needs to cool first but you see the point.)
Bush's old man cut the funding to the project. The one in princton was breaking even. This means it was producing enough power to feed itself. This was not expected for that phase of the project. entire project was 5 years ahead of sched and only ็,000 dollars over budget. the lowest overrun to date (the date being when they got cancled)
Your goverment at work.
------------------
Fucknuggets flamed while you wait.< TeamWolfguard.com >
This message has been edited by CatKnight on April 06, 2001 at 09:44 AM
------------------
"I am not a Marxist." -- Karl Marx
The Japanese tokamak has reached the equivalent of break even, up to Q=1.25, using only deuterium, but no one has demonstrated actual break-even with deuterium/tritium. I don't think anyone has come close to ignition, though.
step 1. it helps to know where the fuckers gonna hit so you can be FAR away from it.
step 2. providing you are at least 6-10km away from the blast nucleus, just a couple of feet dug down below ground level will provide survivable protection. (a concrete bunker helps too)
step 3. if you get flash blindness dont panic. providing you survive the blast your sight is capable of returning...sometimes. illegal tests done in nevada showed that 8 out of 10 people can stare directly at the blast and not have permanent damage done.
step 4. last resort pray to god that its an air detonation and try to get yourself directly under the blast (if you're to close to run like fuck) the explosion creates a bubble protecting you. this is actually true although i'm not sure if it works for all types of warheads. how is this true? well the nevada guys again decided to "experiment" by chucking some film crew under a nuke tower blowing it up and have them film it. yes they did actually survive. other proof is in hiroshima theres a tree still a live from the blast epicentre.
step 5. there is no step five what remains of you body is but a small pile of carbinised dust where you didnt or couldnt follow the above guidelines... welcome to the afterlife next week coping with the after effects of being nuked
i'm a scientist so it MUST be true... IT MUST or the big men come round and break ma legs
------------------
Hey DKB shu'p with all that jibba jabber ya crazy foo!
quote:
Originally posted by StanVanDam:
US isn't exactly the best liked country in the world right now. They don't NEED this "defence" system.
Not that I agree or disagree... but that didn't help your case out any 
george bush is a freakin conservative and that means a lot of things will be more restricted than before and we'll have to listen to.. ergh.. him.. and i dont like it one bit! the american president does not exactly control just america. more like a shade of canada and some other countries.
i mean really, canada pretty much gave in "ph33r" when they gave up 500 million dollars on a stupid defense system theyre not even supposed to be concerned with.
in a metaphorical sentence-
america is a dog, and its getting some steak, and canada is the lil puppy hopping in a lil for the little bit of fat on the side.
sorry to say america is a dog but u get the idea.
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight Bob:step 1. it helps to know where the fuckers gonna hit so you can be FAR away from it.
Distance will not help because the wind will blow radioactive matter all over(the wind changes direction once every 12 seconds)
quote:step 2. providing you are at least 6-10km away from the blast nucleus, just a couple of feet dug down below ground level will provide survivable protection.
not so. radioactive matter will be in the air for at least a year, and it will be absorbed into the rain and will give you radiation poisoning
quote:
(a concrete bunker helps too)
a lead-lined reinforced concrete bunker might be SLIGHTLY better
quote:step 3. if you get flash blindness dont panic. providing you survive the blast your sight is capable of returning...sometimes. illegal tests done in nevada showed that 8 out of 10 people can stare directly at the blast and not have permanent damage done.
The height of human intelligence today. 8 people out of every 10 are stupid enough to stare directly into a nuclear blast.
*sigh*
------------------
What's in a name?
A rose by any other name would still smell as sweet -- William Shakespeare
This message has been edited by Dysorderia on April 06, 2001 at 09:55 PM
quote:
Originally posted by solid:
george bush is a freakin conservative and that means a lot of things will be more restricted than before... [blah blah blah. more canadian crap]
Do you understand the concept of a conservative in America? It's the idea of less restrictions. Liberals want Gun Control, Speech Control, Media Control, More Taxes, Environmental Control, and a host of other things that keep control in the hands of the government. It's not my political view, it's the GOD DAMNED TRUTH!!!!! The dichotemy in America is Liberal or Conservative. A liberal wants more centralized government, where a conservative wants a decentralized one... ie, in the hands of states and, ultimately, in the hands of the people.
IMHO, conservatives think more practically and logically. They deal with the 'here and now' and deal with what will get us through. Liberals want drastic actions that might work now, or might work 200 years from now. There is clearly no way to stick to one side, but a good balance (on the right side, preferably) will get us through.
Welcome to the land of the informed. We enjoy it here.
quote:
Originally posted by askheaves:
Do you understand the concept of a conservative in America? It's the idea of less restrictions.
umm...that depends...do you want to have an abortion? do you want to use drugs? do want to do anything at all?
quote:(buzzer)
Originally posted by askheaves:
Do you understand the concept of a conservative in America? It's the idea of less restrictions. Liberals want Gun Control, Speech Control, Media Control, More Taxes, Environmental Control, and a host of other things that keep control in the hands of the government. It's not my political view, it's the GOD DAMNED TRUTH!!!!!
Im sorry.
that's not the correct answer.
What does "liberty" mean?
Anybody?
Yes, that's right, it means freedom, not restrictions.
Any idiot can see that Liberals would go for freedom of choice.
What you are saying makes about as much sense as a glass hammer or a chocolate fireguard
quote:
The dichotemy in America is Liberal or Conservative. A liberal wants more centralized government, where a conservative wants a decentralized one... ie, in the hands of states and, ultimately, in the hands of the people.IMHO, conservatives think more practically and logically. They deal with the 'here and now' and deal with what will get us through. Liberals want drastic actions that might work now, or might work 200 years from now. There is clearly no way to stick to one side, but a good balance (on the right side, preferably) will get us through.
Welcome to the land of the informed. We enjoy it here.
*bullshit mode*
Yeah.
America, the land of the free where peace and prosperity reigns supreme
*bullshit mode off*
There is NOTHING humble about your opinion, askheaves.
*sigh*
------------------
What's in a name?
A rose by any other name would still smell as sweet -- William Shakespeare
To think a whole state voted for him?
What also pisses me off is that no matter how screwy a country can get- if it were the americans, they'd still defend their country through their words (or actions).
It's not the jelousey that your country might just as well be the best in the world, my question is how they get that status. It isn't through hard work alone- it's sided with intense manipulation. Then again so do a lot of other countries- which is what's one of the things that's wrong with the world today, IMO.
quote:
What does "liberty" mean?
Anybody?
Yes, that's right, it means freedom, not restrictions.
Any idiot can see that Liberals would go for freedom of choice.
idiot. that's just a name they use. like democrats and republicans. it's not like republicans are for a republic govn't and democrats are for a democratic govn't.
quote:
step 4. last resort pray to god that its an air detonation and try to get yourself directly under the blast (if you're to close to run like fuck) the explosion creates a bubble protecting you. this is actually true although i'm not sure if it works for all types of warheads. how is this true? well the nevada guys again decided to "experiment" by chucking some film crew under a nuke tower blowing it up and have them film it. yes they did actually survive. other proof is in hiroshima theres a tree still a live from the blast epicentre.
I HIGHLY fucking doubt that.
quote:That's fission, not fusion, you twit.
Originally posted by L33T_h4x0r_d00d:Can you say BOOOOM?
quote:That "here and now" thinking is what gets us into such problems as overcrowding and traffic congestion. It doesn't allow for long-term solutions. Not everything can be fixed instantaneously, and once its fixed, it has to stay that way for a long time. Like roads. A balance of both [parties] would be the way to go, but then, nothing would get done, since both sides would be bickering the whole time.
Originally posted by askheaves:IMHO, conservatives think more practically and logically. They deal with the 'here and now' and deal with what will get us through. Liberals want drastic actions that might work now, or might work 200 years from now. There is clearly no way to stick to one side, but a good balance (on the right side, preferably) will get us through.
I think Bush is an idiot. He just doesn't come across as someone all that bright. His speeches are hilarious to watch for that reason. I hope nobody tries to shoot him, because if he doesn't get us into a war, you can be damn sure Cheney will.
------------------
<º(((><
This message has been edited by TallAssAzn on April 07, 2001 at 07:08 PM
------------------
"I am not a Marxist." -- Karl Marx
quote:
That's fission, not fusion, you twit.
that's neither, you twit.
------------------
If you have multiple personalties and think about suicide is it a hostage situation???
I don't think modern fusion warheads do that. Fusion = you die.
------------------
It's the pop-o-matic bubble, motherfucker!
------------------
Hey DKB shu'p with all that jibba jabber ya crazy foo!
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight Bob:
dont believe all that propaganda crap catnight! nuclear bombs arent that dangerous at all in fact they're quite nice things actually
Yeah.....if you have a deathwish
------------------
What's in a name?
A rose by any other name would still smell as sweet -- William Shakespeare
Main Entry: lib·er·al
Pronunciation: 'li-b(&-)r&l
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin liberalis suitable for a freeman, generous, from liber free; perhaps akin to Old English lEodan to grow, Greek eleutheros free
Date: 14th century
1 a : of, relating to, or based on the liberal arts <liberal education> b archaic : of or befitting a man of free birth
2 a : marked by generosity : OPENHANDED <a liberal giver> b : given or provided in a generous and openhanded way <a liberal meal> c : AMPLE, FULL
3 obsolete : lacking moral restraint : LICENTIOUS
4 : not literal or strict : LOOSE <a liberal translation>
5 : BROAD-MINDED; especially : not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or traditional forms
6 a : of, favoring, or based upon the principles of liberalism b capitalized : of or constituting a political party advocating or associated with the principles of political liberalism; especially : of or constituting a political party in the United Kingdom associated with ideals of individual especially economic freedom, greater individual participation in government, and constitutional, political, and administrative reforms designed to secure these objectives
- lib·er·al·ly /-b(&-)r&-lE/ adverb
- lib·er·al·ness noun
synonyms LIBERAL, GENEROUS, BOUNTIFUL, MUNIFICENT mean giving or given freely and unstintingly. LIBERAL suggests openhandedness in the giver and largeness in the thing or amount given <a teacher liberal with her praise>. GENEROUS stresses warmhearted readiness to give more than size or importance of the gift <a generous offer of help>. BOUNTIFUL suggests lavish, unremitting giving or providing <children spoiled by bountiful presents>. MUNIFICENT suggests a scale of giving appropriate to lords or princes <a munificent foundation grant>.
Replies to a whole lot of things here..
1) Republican/Democrat..
I'm afraid a healthy dose of skepticism is required here.. *nobody* in government is trying to give you more freedom. Everyone is trying to please their campaign contributors so that they can get more money next time.. (examples: bush vs. the environment, Bush for Microsoft, The DMCA.)
2) Missile Defence (hey, that's the forum topic, isn't it?)
If I was America, and I had generated as much bad feeling in the world as you have, I'd *seriously* want a *limited* missile defence screen. There are some *crazy* MoFos out there with a real Anti-American Spin going...
The nightmare case is actually not about someone launching trans-atlantic.. it's about someone launching from mexico, Canada, or (god forbid) just off the American Coast.
Anyway... Back to work..
T
definition 5 does suit the liberal way of thinking well, but the others do not. liberals (i.e. democrats) are for more government regulation and "less freedom". don't let the name fool you, like it did hundreds of millions of other americans.
idiot
quote:
Originally posted by StanVanDam:
And THAT'S why there's a lot of Anti-American shiat goin around. Shit like building missile defence system and spying on everybody and bombing things by "accident" (Chinese Embassy). Being where ppl don't want them to be (Yemen/North Vietnam). VERY hypocritical (1967, Soviet MIG in Japan, totally disassembled by US, sent back to Russia in many pieces).
Jesus christ, misinformation spreads like fucking wild fire.
in regards to the MiG:
Yes, a MiG defected to an US airbase in Asia somewhere (can't remember where exactly). Now the Soviets wanted it back. The US wanted its secrets with out the Soviets knowing they knew. So they rolled it into a hanger, stripped it down, took it apart, photographed, x-rayed, etc, and then put it all back together. All in just 48 hrs. Then the Soviets came, picked up their plane, and flew it back. They never knew the Americans pulled it off (although I'm sure they had suspicions) Untill the US admitted to it in what I belive was the late-80's.
------------------
When my flying days are over, and my death has come to pass
I hope they bury me upside down, so the whole damn world can kiss my ass