01-14-2004, 07:10 AM
|
#14 (permalink)
|
|
Junkie
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Dragonlich
Rekna, although even the smartest people can be wrong, that doesn't say anything. I can give you a list of examples where professionals build something that works perfectly after decades or even centuries (hoover dam, most of the great wall of china, many old buildings and bridges in Europe); but what exactly would that prove?
And "can't be done" is too easy an answer. In the past, we were sure we couldn't sail around the world. Nor could we fly, or go to the moon, nor do many other things we now see as normal, as you yourself said.
There is no fundamental problem with the concept of shooting down ballistic missiles. It's simply a very difficult thing to do, but that only makes it difficult, not impossible. The results may not be perfect, but the side-effects can be nice too: higher-speed computers, high-precision targeting systems, highly maneuverable missiles, etc. All these things can (and will) then be used in the civilian world too.
Another option for defending against ballistic missiles would be to shoot your own nukes into the sky, and explode them near the incoming missiles. I prefer a more accurate (and less deadly) defence.
|
We are on the same page Dragonlich. I was arguing that we can't discount the use of a missle system just because a bunch of experts say it can't be done. |
|
|