Comments on: Let’s end bogus missile defense testing http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/07/16/lets-end-bogus-missile-defense-testing/ Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: BillyOccam http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/07/16/lets-end-bogus-missile-defense-testing/#comment-74562 Wed, 07 Aug 2013 16:22:21 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=22388#comment-74562 Either you have never worked in the design and development of complex systems, or you want an end to missile defense development.

Every complex system endures many failures, unexpected setbacks, and unanticipated costs, because scientists and engineers must learn many new things in the course of development.Such work is not like building a house where all the potential problems are known and have been solved many times.

Complex system developers can only acknowledge that there will be “unknown unknowns” to discover and resolve before success. The only way to deal with that ever-present reality is to toss in a “fudge factor” for time and costs and hope that it is big enough to allow completion of the projects before someone yells “fraud”.

Calling a missile defense program “fake” because every test doesn’t go the way YOU think it should is either manifest ignorance or ill-intentioned sophistry.

]]>
By: coylewe http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/07/16/lets-end-bogus-missile-defense-testing/#comment-74322 Sat, 27 Jul 2013 07:11:33 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=22388#comment-74322 I like this article. It represents a common sense point of view over what is likely just a huge waste of money and government resources. However, upon seeing the news of this system’s third failure, I couldn’t help but wonder if the failure itself was intentional. Consider this: you’re amazing at pool. In fact, you’re so good that you use your prowess over a billiard table to make money off of those that challenge you. One day, you walk into a pool hall in the next town over because another well known, and very rich, billiard enthusiast plays there often. Assuming you’re better than he is, and you will ultimately beat him, he’s unlikely to place any large bets against a player he’s never met before that walks in and starts flexing his muscles, so to speak, all over the place. So you, being an experienced and world class pool hustler, play a few games on the next table over from him and perform under par. Once he notices and decides that you would be an easy target, you both place your bets and then you slaughter him. I know this sounds a little cartoonish, comparing our missile defense strategy to pool sharking, but I wonder about it none the less. How do any of us know that the government isn’t just waiting for North Korea or Iran to “bet big” with an ICBM strike? If by “failing” over and over again, with a system that we already know is 100% effective, we lure an enemy into attacking us, the government would be able to march into all out conventional war that same day and dispatch a looming threat that’s angering half the world with their threats. This just seems more likely to me than the U.S. military failing time and time again…and then publishing those failures in news that’s visible all over the world. If I trip and fall in my own house, and there’s nobody around to see it, I don’t brag about it to every person that will listen to me. I just can’t believe the government would be so forthcoming about the failures of the only functioning defense we have against a nuclear attack unless there was some clever, underlying reason for it.

]]>
By: Agicola http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/07/16/lets-end-bogus-missile-defense-testing/#comment-74286 Fri, 26 Jul 2013 14:15:29 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=22388#comment-74286 Sigh. This article is all biased opinion and silly hyperbole – very little attempt to present rational reasons why this concept is bad or too expensive. For instance – of course a basic capabilities test is not going to be a 100% realistic simulation of combat conditions. Duh. The comparison to “practicing hunting by shooting a tied deer” is silly and just insults our intelligence – BMD is at the stage where they are only testing if the gun regularly fires straight. Emotional rants like ‘It will never ever ever work!’ just ring as hollow as ‘heavier than air flight is impossible!’. Also, all military systems are subject to enemy counter-measures. Again; duh. The answer here is to demand they design a platform that can be quickly updated to match new enemy developments instead of screaming “It’s a boondogle”. Alas, the real error seems to have been when the GWB administration (for political reasons) decided to rush missile defense into actual deployment, years before it was ready. Put this thing back into R&D, work out the bugs and *then* deploy it. Will it cost a lot of money? Of course, but having a credible missile defense is sadly a necessary reality for a few more decades it seems… and therefore a pretty worthy investment on a lot of levels. If you have fact-based counter-arguments, let’s hear em.

]]>
By: Geekster1015 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/07/16/lets-end-bogus-missile-defense-testing/#comment-74126 Mon, 22 Jul 2013 17:31:15 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=22388#comment-74126 Butt, Yousaf…it appears clear you have never built a complex production system…To best appreciate a work of art it is best to understand how difficult it is to paint or sculpt. To understand the complexities of soccer (football) it is best to play it first …To provide comment on this weekends British Open it is best to have played golf …and played it at the highest levels. It would be silly and superflous for example to have a football player provide golf commentary…This would be like….well like ….a physicist commenting on the complexities of building and testing a missile defense shield…Maybe instead you should ask if it is a politically good thing to do (because we’re all equally stupid when it comes to politics)….Maybe you should ask is it a good idea to move away from the cold war era of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD)…Maybe MAD is a good enough deterrent against regimes that believe it is Allah’s will that Islam (as they see it) destroy the western world… MAD is a sure way to world destruction. A missile defense shield currently appears te only way to prevent MAD without getting rid of all the nukes/chem/bio missiles… Maybe you should be asking is it worth it to the world to work at developing a missile defense shield to prevent MAD as the only deterrent to global thermo nuclear war, instead of telling Michelson his swing sucks…

]]>
By: Neurochuck http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/07/16/lets-end-bogus-missile-defense-testing/#comment-74057 Fri, 19 Jul 2013 01:50:21 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=22388#comment-74057 I had an neighbor who lived in Serbia when they were fighting the Americans in the 90s.
He was very amused and proud that the government published plans for tanks made from wood and painted canvas or plastic which locals could build out on farms or in parks.
The Americans would fly expensive missions to discover them, and then blow them up with expensive laser guided bombs, as the villagers all clapped and cheered.

]]>
By: zotdoc http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/07/16/lets-end-bogus-missile-defense-testing/#comment-74041 Thu, 18 Jul 2013 17:51:14 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=22388#comment-74041 failure and the analysis of why something failed is very important in any new system development. Eventually, you will have a reliable system. 20 billion a year isn’t much money in the grand scheme of things. It was estimated that at least 60 billion a year could be saved on medicare with tort reform, but our president said that was an insignificant amount of money compared to the total health cost.

]]>
By: possibilianP http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/07/16/lets-end-bogus-missile-defense-testing/#comment-73999 Wed, 17 Jul 2013 13:44:51 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=22388#comment-73999 Correct me if I’m wrong, but we have been throwing at least $20 billion per year (in the beginning, much much more) at this project since Reagan started it. How much has it cost us so far? And why do we continue throwing money at it? Oh yea, the missile contractors are in bed with Congress.
Now let’s say the “liberals” started some new project to launch $20 billion in cash per year over poor neighborhoods to drop cash on them. How long do you think it’d take before the TV and radio ads were flooded with negative attack ads about wasteful liberal spending? Oh well, at least the Star Wars spending keeps money flowing, unfortunately into the wrong hands, but at least it’s flowing.

]]>
By: Proxyariesman http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/07/16/lets-end-bogus-missile-defense-testing/#comment-73996 Wed, 17 Jul 2013 11:08:41 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=22388#comment-73996 Quick note, the thebulletin.org link doesn’t work.

Other than that, I’ll just leave this here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_LurJfOS iA

Failures are actually good, it allows us to learn from those mistakes and build on them. They’ll keep trying, and keep learning from failures until something finally pans out. Believe it or not, they are actually near as a few tests have been successful in the past (from reading previous articles in WSJ and NYTimes.) It’s only a matter of time before the success is 100%..but your alternative ideas are good too. I say all of the above. I’m a big defense person..so that’s openly my own bias. I’m for getting the system, perfecting it and selling it to fund and build a better system.

]]>
By: Rebuild1989 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/07/16/lets-end-bogus-missile-defense-testing/#comment-73993 Wed, 17 Jul 2013 01:49:40 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=22388#comment-73993 These are ground-based systems. If we switch to the air-based Brilliant Pebbles system, with multiple stations(upwards of 40000), we’ll have a working shield.

]]>
By: auger http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/07/16/lets-end-bogus-missile-defense-testing/#comment-73992 Wed, 17 Jul 2013 01:48:58 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=22388#comment-73992 And not the first time the test was ” essentially rigged” – although they had to be called out on the first test before admitting this little sin of omission. Google ‘SDI’ – and try to figure the course, cost, and confusion of this boondoggle started in the ’80’s (and never ended). Maybe a trillion? Who cares how it began – can’t someone stop it please

]]>