If anyone thinks that those 2 kooks will do the "mutual assured destruction" math correctly, and be deterred by our retaliation.. Forgitaboutit. Amadinajob, doesn't even care about Jordan and Syria being "collateral damage" from a strike on Israel..
The ground-based system concept for BMD was much better in handling the threat of "multiple warhead" vehicles and decoys. The Navy Aegis stuff is good in tactical theatre against simple single warheads on Intermed. and Short Range missiles. That's where it's been really tested. Any real shield for ICBMs needs multiple radars and a lot more resources than those cruisers probably have.
For ICBMs in a real nuclear conflict -- The US still has close to zero defense capability -even with Aegis - even with warning. Lefties should keep that in mind when they're putting their kids to sleep. It's DEFENSE that we SHOULD spend our money on. Not Offense. Any true Liberal would tell you that..
{I worked on stuff related to this for about 5 years in my "spookier days"}
BTW: FinnBow -- The Reagan Star Wars concept called for laser and even nuclear weapons as intercept vehicles, but the wieny winers only let us throw
rocks at the incoming
NUCLEAR weapons.. You pack a WARHEAD on those kinetic kill vehicles and see what the intercept scores would be.... Whiners like that remind of the British tut-tutting about us shooting at them from the trees..
