Star Wars Lives!
In March 1983, Ronald Reagan turned American nuclear policy upside-down, giving a speech in which he called for replacing the policy of MAD--"mutual assured destruction"--with a defense that would genuinely defend the United States against ballistic missiles. Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative so rattled the Soviets that it proved central in their collapse--Margaret Thatcher called SDI the most important decision Reagan ever made--but it was widely derided by the Union of Concerned Scientists and the Democratic Party.
A Ricochet member reminds me every so often that the Strategic Defense Initiative is now--if a couple of decades late--underway. When he mentioned the name of the test site, which is located on Kwajelin Atoll, not far from Wake Island, I asked him to send me a photograph.
Somewhere, the Gipper is smiling.
- Comment (14)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (4)
Comments:
Dec '10
Re: Star Wars Lives!
Mr. Chauvinist was supposed to field an experiment out on Kwaj this fall before his 30-year career in DOD contracting was terminated by the kind of unserious incompetent leadership we have in the WH now. He's an optimistic sort now happily employed in the private economy, but he was really looking forward to another countdown and learning something new about the science of missile defense.
He started his career under Reagan's SDI out at the Nevada Test Site doing Underground Nuclear Testing. Interestingly, his career has come full circle as his new job is radiation assurance testing for satellite components.
Still, I'm afraid [ed. the Member's] photo would make him nostalgic, if not a little melancholy. This is the problem with poor leadership. So much talent and potential gets carelessly tossed aside.
Edited on August 22, 2011 at 12:09amJul '10
Re: Star Wars Lives!
Love it.
Sep '10
Re: Star Wars Lives!
Is that an Air Force post?
I only ask because in the army a Sergeant Major or higher would have been the NCOIC.
Dec '10
Re: Star Wars Lives!
This is a fine sign of stunted progress, but we need to stake down terms.
Yes, I understand there could be much quibbling on this site, but let's, please, try to nail down an acceptable definition, without boring others.
Ballistic means a missile so powerful that it can (sort of) break free of gravity, then, without necessarily going into orbit, coast. It then comes back down.
Under my simplified definition, that means that distances on Earth become somewhat irrelevant. Neighbors are no longer the threats.
Now, look at this. Without being able to offer an informed opinion about the intelligence behind the article, I posit that the point is that we cannot adequately deal with ballistic threats from all over, now or any time soon. It seems clear to me that while we laboriously work towards a defense against a ballistic threat, our enemies just proliferate ballistic threats, becuase it costs them next to nothing to do so.
Economics is how we defeat enemies, not road building. Those that would do us harm must fear harming us, lest they hurt themselves.
Mar '11
Re: Star Wars Lives!
The Union of Concerned Scientists were in violation of the first of Clarke's Laws. To wit: When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
I was just out of school at the time, in the company of engineers who were adept at doing difficult things, and viewed the classification of impossible as a budget and schedule issue. I recall estimates being ballparked, diagrams being scrawled on the backs of envelopes and cocktail napkins, and guesstimates being flung with abandon. I don't recall hearing anyone say impossible.
Jun '11
Re: Star Wars Lives!
CJ,
Your definition of ballistic missile should be more accurately labeled intercontinental ballistic missile. The fact that a missile is ballistic, meaning it uses its propulsion to go up but then uses gravity to come down, doesn't mean it has unlimited range. Your definition would technically include a mortar round. Note that the article mentions the ballistic missiles in question would have to be in our hemisphere (Venezuela) in order for them to be a threat.
It is true that missile development, even in the middle east, proceeds apace but it will be some time before Iran has a missile that can be fired from Iran and hit the US. If we put our minds to it we should be able to develop a defense against such missiles by the time the Islamists achieve the range necessary to hit us.
The big challange in my opinion is to convince the American people that, in a world where Iran has the ability to launch a missile strike against the US, it will be necessary for us to gain the ultimate high ground: space, in order to defend ourselves.
Sep '10
Re: Star Wars Lives!
The Left's opposition to Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative was what broke my flirtation with liberal politics in the 80s. I had given the liberals the benefit of the doubt until then, but when the Left asserted that missile defense was evil evil bad evil, I had to stop and think. Even if it would be impossible to make a "shield" against ballistic missile attacks, surely we should at least try.
The Left wanted--and still wants--the US to rely on deterrence, which is no defense against people who would gladly die if only we died first. Sooner or later these people will have the means.
May '11
Re: Star Wars Lives!
One-Eyed Jack:
The big challange in my opinion is to convince the American people that, in a world where Iran has the ability to launch a missile strike against the US, it will be necessary for us to gain the ultimate high ground: space, in order to defend ourselves. · Aug 21 at 6:10pm
We cannot advance this technology too soon. The Chinese are also a major concern and they keep increasing their military spending.
Jun '11
Re: Star Wars Lives!
L.T. Rahe
One-Eyed Jack:
The big challange in my opinion is to convince the American people that, in a world where Iran has the ability to launch a missile strike against the US, it will be necessary for us to gain the ultimate high ground: space, in order to defend ourselves. · Aug 21 at 6:10pm
We cannot advance this technology too soon. The Chinese are also a major concern and they keep increasing their military spending. · Aug 21 at 7:42pm
The Chinese will militarize space and when they do all of our expensive GPS guided weaponry will be useless unless we are able to defend our GPS satellites against a Chinese attack.
Dec '10
Re: Star Wars Lives!
One-Eyed Jack
The Chinese will militarize space and when they do all of our expensive GPS guided weaponry will be useless unless we are able to defend our GPS satellites against a Chinese attack. · Aug 21 at 8:42pm
I believe that this was the whole point of the tiny space shuttle looking outfit that the AirForce developed totally in secret and then "Ta DA!!!!!" unveiled when the actual shuttle was retired.
They want to be able to put new sats in orbit faster than the ChiComs can knock them down.
Also, IIRC anyway, we developed an anti-satellite missile sometime in the late 1980's or early 1990's that was meant to be fired from the operational ceiling of an F15. I cannot remember if it was ever tested though.
The ChiCom killer sats DO work, and have been tested in orbit (much to NASA and NORAD's chagrin).
We will have to answer that capability with something other than satellites by the six pack eventually, if we ever hope to be able to best the PLA in ground operations.
Edited on August 22, 2011 at 8:01amDec '10
Re: Star Wars Lives!
CJ, I think the point you are missing (aside from your incorrect definition of the threat) is that modern missile defense will be just as cheap and easy to service as the incoming missiles. It is not like the kill missile costs 100X what the aggressor missile does.
For a look at how it will work, look at Israel's Iron Dome system, which they use now to shoot down short range rockets (which are actually harder to track and kill because their time from launch to target impact is so short).
In the past two or three years there have been several successful intercepts off the coast of Hawaii done under extremely realistic test conditions (rain, night, surprise attack, heavy clouds, multiple targets, extremely short range, etc).
At this point, it's not a question of if it'll work, but more a matter of when it can be produced and maintained as a large integrated system.
As was said above, at this point it is largely a matter of budget and sticking to the schedule.
May '10
Re: Star Wars Lives!
CoolHand
Also, IIRC anyway, we developed an anti-satellite missile sometime in the late 1980's or early 1990's that was meant to be fired from the operational ceiling of an F15. I cannot remember if it was ever tested though.
It was tested successfully in the early 80's. My senior year of college I helped lead a class design project to redesign the system and we attracted some negative attention from the arms control community who didn't seem to understand it was just an academic exercise. The author had no reservations about reposting our data on his own website, which kind of irks me.
(Aside: looking back at the project description, it's apparent that we gave the spacecraft guys too much influence on the missile spec. "Triple redundancy for all systems"?!)
Jun '10
Re: Star Wars Lives!
CJ: Check in with me at Rico.Pilgrim@gmail.com if you are interested in a Sunshine Soiree (Florida). Any other FLRicos equally welcome.
Edited on August 22, 2011 at 5:56pmDec '10
Re: Star Wars Lives!
Mark Wilson
"Triple redundancy for all systems"?!) · Aug 22 at 12:49am
Heh.
"Guys! It's supposed to explode."