Blogcritics: Comments on Missile Defense in my lifetime?

Comment by andy marsh

Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:18:56 EST

Nice work Shark. And I think they were 767's?

Comment by Shark

Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:11:49 EST

As I illustrated shortly after 9/11: "They better have a setting for crop duster." (...and that begs the question: "Can they hit a Boeing 757 over NY City?!") feh. More military-industrial welfare handouts from the "reduce big government" GOP party.

Comment by Mark Saleski

Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:01:33 EST

oops, another 'defense' system that we've spent billions on...that doesn't work. defense contractor welfare is alive & well.

Comment by andy marsh

Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:00:29 EST

I think the problem may be Raytheon...aren't they involved with the Patriot also?

Comment by andy marsh

Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:58:50 EST

The test was $85 Million. I just read that the budget is $10 billion for fiscal year 2005. I'd like to see it work also. It amazes me that we could hit the moon but we can't seem to hit an ICBM. Much smaller target I guess.

Comment by Temple Stark

Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:53:28 EST

IMHO we can do the technology - but it will cost trillions to get it right and I'm not sure (expert though I am -- ahem) we can do it to any worthwhile success rate in the next 50 years.

Comment by Mark Saleski

Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:37:00 EST

and how many BILLIONS are we flushing on this 'defense'?

Comment by RJ

Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:34:48 EST

This is a disappointing result. But the technology is still worth developing further. If some crazy regime (like North Korea or Iran) throws a few nukes at us, it would be nice to know we have SOME form of defense against the attack, even if it is imperfect...