In 2009, after years of reports about dramatic cost overruns, long delays and technological failures, President Obama announced he was essentially scrapping the Bush-era missile defense plan for Europe, replacing it with a new, more mobile version that was supposed to be cheaper and easier to get off the ground.
Fast forward to today, and a pair of new reports from the GAO and the Pentagon’s advisory body are casting yet more doubts on the new system, noting it is plagued by many of the same problems of the abandoned system.
The Defense Science Board’s report points out a number of major problems, and offers no solutions. Experts say that the problems could be enormously expensive, if they can be fixed at all. The GAO report, as so many in the past, points out that the scheme is already costing way more than it was supposed to, and probably isn’t going to work at any rate.
In many ways, the biggest problems with the plan are political, however. Despite claiming the schemes target Iran, the Bush and Obama Administration both insisted on putting the missile defense systems along the Russian frontier, angering Russian officials.
But with the Presidential election coming up, keeping the system in place to show they are being “tough” with Russia is likely to be an issue for both major candidates, and cancelling a system just because it doesn’t work and is an enormous waste of money is unlikely to even be considered.
According to missile engineer Bob Aldridge -www.plrc.org-the Pentagon aims to achieve a disarming first strike capability. The US Navy can track and destroy all enemy submarines simultaneously according to Bob Aldridge. Navstar, now called GPS, was made to get an accuracy of less than 30 meters for Minuteman-3 and Trident-2, necessary to destroy missile silos. The warheads on Minuteman-3 and Trident-2 are designed to minimize nuclear winter effects if used against missile silos according to Professor Paul Rogers. Professor J. Edward Anderson: The deployment of anti-missile missiles in Eastern Europe is part of a first-strike strategy. Der Spiegel 49/2011: The US Missile Shield in Eastern Europe will be fully operational by 2020. This leads to Launch On Warning and Accidental Nuclear War. The anti-missile missiles are to take out the Russian second strike force, i.e. the missiles surviving First Strike with Minuteman-3 and Trident-2. CND Information Officer David Guinness suggests that the coming disarming/unanswerable first strike capability is only for Blackmail. What may the Russians think of possible blackmail in a crisis ? At any rate, it leads to Launch On Warning and danger of Accidental Suicide.
An overpriced underpowered boondoggle to meet a threat that doesn’t exist.
No, they are to take out the Russian second strike force, i.e. the missiles surviving First Strike with Minuteman-3 and Trident-2. Missile engineer Bob Aldridge -www.plrc.org-"Whether they are on ships or land, they are still a necessary component for an unanswerable first strike." General Harbottle stated: "They are bloody fools in the Pentagon" because they think they can get away with a First Strike and avoid Nuclear Winter by the design of the warheads on Minuteman-3 and Trident-2 hitting only silos. Why don´t they realize that the result will be Launch On Warning and suicide ? Of course, they ARE bloody fools as the good general stated but is that the full explanation: They are simply bloody fools ?