Quote:
Originally posted by Lebell
Just to answer the first question,
I believe Kim Jong Il would fire a missle if he felt he were on the way out, simply because he doesn't give a rat's ass about anything outside of his massively ass kissed ego.
So is this system necessary?
IMO, maybe.
|
A) The system would have to be pretty advanced and have 100% accuracy. If it doesn't work the first time, then it is a total waste. All tests done so far have been so controlled that a real world situation is likely going to be too much for it too handle. The simplest defense counter-mechanisms (like an array of duds firing near it) could easy render the missile defense useless.
B) If Kim Jong Il or any other leader did that I would be very surprised. Nuclear weapons are points of leverage, when they are used they have no leverage and the entire international community will come crashing down on whoever would such a brash move. Even the most insane leaders want to keep their power. I've studied this extensively in the last few years, and absolutely everything about it goes against the rational actor assumptions we go by (political realists and liberals alike).
C) Missile Defense cannot work on as a safeguard against a massive first strike or even a response strike (if the world goes that far down the hole, count me out).
D) Missile Defense encourages the proliferation of nuclear weapons. The more we invest in Missile Defense, the more other nations are going to invest in nuclear weapons out of necessity. Historically, we know what happens when any nation tries to make itself impervious to foriegn attack. This is scene as an offensive maneuvor. If we cannot be attacked, then we are free to attack anyone. The classic example is how the Peloponnesian War started because the Spartans were worried that the power hungry Athenians were trying to make themselves invincible with their city wall. Attacking Athens was a more of a defensive move because building the wall was seen as offensive - just like Missile Defense is being viewed by other nation-states.
If Missile Defense is necessary, then we are admitting that our international relations with other nations has deteriorated so far that other nations refuse to see us as rational actors or that we truly are so offensive that attacking us is a realistic defensive move. If either of those things are true, then we have larger problems than if one or two missiles come flying at us from "rogue nations". Deterrence caused by MAD should be enough, esp. for nations that don't have excessive nuclear arsenals.