Romney's Stupidity on showcase.

[jmcslob]

Mitt Romney linked North Korea's failed rocket launch to the Obama administration in a statement released late Thursday night, saying the president's efforts to appease the regime have "emboldened" Pyongyang.
In a statement condemning the launch, Romney said President Barack Obama has "no effective response" to North Korea's weapons program and supported a "food-aid deal" "that proved to be as naive as it was short-lived."
"At the same time, he has cut critical U.S. missile defense programs and continues to underfund them," Romney said. "This incompetence from the Obama Administration has emboldened the North Korean regime and undermined the security of the United States and our allies."
North Korea's Thursday rocket launch—which leaders claimed was designed to put a satellite into orbit—ended almost as soon as it began, with the rocket breaking into pieces.
The White House also released a statement condemning North Korea's actions.
Romney reportedly plans to make the president's foreign policy a sharper focus of campaign attacks—which up until now have most notably centered on the weak economy.
According to an ABC News/Washington Post poll released this week, Americans favor Obama over Romney on international affairs 53 to 36 percent. Survey participants identified foreign policy as an issue area of strength for the president.

Article

[ninkobei]

I like the part where Romney bagged on Obama for going to harvard, while Romney has spent more years at Harvard than Obama.

[Jizzler]

Definitely.

The plan was executed well. Food-aid makes you look good, and it was given with stipulations that would ensure a positive outcome regardless if they were followed or not.

[FordGT90Concept]

Is Obama's policies towards North Korea working? No. Has Obama cut missile defense spending? Yes. Where's the stupidity on Romney's part? I don't see any.


Food has no impact on the North Korean political climate because it likely goes to those in charge of the country who already have plenty of food. North Korean is a militaristic, communist dicatorship and there's only two ways to break those: show their military is weak so the people do not fear it or publically shame the dictator (like a public hanging). Those both plant the seed for revolution. Food, as demonstrated, has no impact but to waste money and embolden those in charge (rewarding bad behavior).

[jmcslob]

Originally Posted by FordGT90Concept

Is Obama's policies towards North Korea working? No. Has Obama cut missile defense spending? Yes. Where's the stupidity on Romney's part? I don't see any.


Food has no impact on the North Korean political climate because it likely goes to those in charge of the country who already have plenty of food. North Korean is a militaristic, communist dicatorship and there's only two ways to break those: show their military is weak so the people do not fear it or publically shame the dictator (like a public hanging). Those both plant the seed for revolution. Food, as demonstrated, has no impact but to waste money and embolden those in charge (rewarding bad behavior).

Are you suffering from amnesia?
Not that long ago...we'll say around Nov, 24, 2010 you were praising this administrations efforts to reinforce the American military in the Korean Peninsula...

Don't forget that N Korea is attached to China and China doesn't want us to bomb, so we don't...This administrations efforts have had more progress than the previous two.

Like or not we have to bait China into doing the right thing...

As for the missile defense....Fuck it!
The programs of missiles hitting missiles are a dead end...
The Navy's laser program has made more progress than Reagan and Bush's retard missile on missile bullshit.

Aren't Republicans always looking for more efficient ways to spend money wisely to get more bang for the buck...So why the fuck would they support a bloated dead end program....doesn't make sense...

[twilyth]

directed energy weapons are a nice idea since they make short work of any decoy mirv's. The problem is that you're fighting the atmosphere. you have to punch through hundreds of miles of it and still have enough kick to do some damage.

[jmcslob]

Originally Posted by twilyth

directed energy weapons are a nice idea since they make short work of any decoy mirv's. The problem is that you're fighting the atmosphere. you have to punch through hundreds of miles of it and still have enough kick to do some damage.

That's where the Navy comes in with fleets around the world and then a last ditch effort with homeland based lasers as well...

Cheaper...much cheaper...more precise...Reagan had the right idea...The patriot program was a short term stop gap hope and prey program...Now that we are actually getting ready to deploy actual working laser weapon platforms the added cost of useless missiles for missiles is....useless LOL...


My point to this btw is that imo Romney is smarter than this and he needs to quit trying to appeal to the idiots....If he doesn't start to show his intelligence then he might as well quit running now...

[twilyth]

Originally Posted by jmcslob

That's where the Navy comes in with fleets around the world and then a last ditch effort with homeland based lasers as well...

Cheaper...much cheaper...more precise...Reagan had the right idea...The patriot program was a short term stop gap hope and prey program...Now that we are actually getting ready to deploy actual working laser weapon platforms the added cost of useless missiles for missiles is....useless LOL...


My point to this btw is that imo Romney is smarter than this and he needs to quit trying to appeal to the idiots....If he doesn't start to show his intelligence than he might as well quit running now...

Well, the original plan was a layered approach I think. You have naval vessels with missiles for the boost phase where a kill vehicle can work perfectly fine as long as you have enough notice. Then there was something called THAAD for the high altitude cruise phase I think. And then you had something else for the re-entry phase. This way you didn't have to count on any one layer being 100%

[FordGT90Concept]

Originally Posted by jmcslob

Not that long ago...we'll say around Nov, 24, 2010 you were praising this administrations efforts to reinforce the American military in the Korean Peninsula...

I did no such thing. Obama's approach to North Korea has always been misguided.

Originally Posted by jmcslob

Don't forget that N Korea is attached to China and China doesn't want us to bomb, so we don't...This administrations efforts have had more progress than the previous two.

China is also not dumb. They know that a nuclear-armed North Korea destablizes the region and creates many problems for China. China wants the situation resolved without droves of refugees crossing their border.

Originally Posted by jmcslob

As for the missile defense....Fuck it!
The programs of missiles hitting missiles are a dead end...
The Navy's laser program has made more progress than Reagan and Bush's retard missile on missile bullshit.

a) interceptor missiles are better than nothing
b) ABL was canceled (the missile intercepter) in December 2011.
c) it was Reagan's idea in the first place with the Strategic Defense Initiative. The Airborne Laser program was based off of SDI research in the 1980s.
d) if you're dead in a nuclear apocalypse, everything else is for naught.

Originally Posted by jmcslob

Aren't Republicans always looking for more efficient ways to spend money wisely to get more bang for the buck...So why the fuck would they support a bloated dead end program....doesn't make sense...

See point d above.

Originally Posted by twilyth

directed energy weapons are a nice idea since they make short work of any decoy mirv's. The problem is that you're fighting the atmosphere. you have to punch through hundreds of miles of it and still have enough kick to do some damage.

And the kill window (boost stage) is small. It's a case of having to be in the right place at the right time. At least its little brother is still in development (Advanced Tactical Laser).

Originally Posted by twilyth

Well, the original plan was a layered approach I think. You have naval vessels with missiles for the boost phase where a kill vehicle can work perfectly fine as long as you have enough notice. Then there was something called THAAD for the high altitude cruise phase I think. And then you had something else for the re-entry phase. This way you didn't have to count on any one layer being 100%

This is correct. GMD (still experimental) -> THAAD (most likely useless against nukes) -> HIMAD (Patriot, useless against nukes) -> Sea Sparrow (useless against nukes) -> CIWS (usless against nukes)

[Bundy]

I agree with what you are saying about North Korea, it is up to China but I also think that US presence there at all (including food aid) is inflaming situation. North Korea needs the US to be visibly present in order to react against it.

Missle defence technology sure has a long way to go but it is beginning to prove effective. Russia wouldn't be protesting about it if there was no value to it.

[FordGT90Concept]

The problem is that China has been historically isolationist. They won't shove unless pushed (like what is happening in the Philipines; also the Taiwan...inaction).

The best solution to the North Korean problem was ignorance. That is, complete media blackout and no acknowledgement it exists. It'll likely drive the DPRK mad--provoking an attack, which would cause a powerful, international response. However, that option is off the table now that DPRK is dabbling in nuclear arms. And to be realistic, there was no stopping the media from covering it anyway.

The only viable option I see now is assassination.

[jmcslob]

Just saying..
ICBM's are not a threat...They are easily predictable, easy to spot and give vast amounts of warning..

Now what we are really worried about are cruise missiles and Sandworm missiles that fly under the radar which missile to missile systems are simply useless against..

We are also more worried about an 18th century steamboat carrying a nuke to our shores more so than an ICBM as an ICBM means suicide to the launching country whereas a tactical nuke carried on an 18th century steamboat can go undetected...


Missile defense equals laser defense and Missile Shield equals wasted money...

[Steevo]

Or you have transmitters aboard our higher flying GPS satellites that can jam the missiles guidance, and or hijack and override it.

Whatever they do is going to require the use of guidance, and unless they have planted enough people to transmit a local ground based path along the route they have to rely on other forms of radio communication, and as such it can be jammed, or you can lie to GPS devices by substituting data.

You can bet that the US has planned for such an issue, as some of the GPS base stations/receivers I play with at work have the ability to transmit/receive a pseudo location.

[FordGT90Concept]

Originally Posted by jmcslob

Just saying..
ICBM's are not a threat...They are easily predictable, easy to spot and give vast amounts of warning..

A single ICBM could wipe 10+ cities off the face of the Earth. The only place remotely safe is a nuclear fallout shelter. Pray tell me, are you within 15 minutes of a nuclear fallout shelter that would accept you? If not, and a MIRV strikes close to you, you'll either be dead or wish you were dead. Minuteman III can travel in excess of 8000 miles at over 15,000 MPH--40 minutes, tops, between launch and detonation.

Originally Posted by jmcslob

Now what we are really worried about are cruise missiles and Sandworm missiles that fly under the radar which missile to missile systems are simply useless against..

Never heard of Sea Sparrow and CIWS? I discussed them two posts ago. They can intercept virtually any non-nuclear weapon.

Originally Posted by jmcslob

We are also more worried about an 18th century steamboat carrying a nuke to our shores more so than an ICBM as an ICBM means suicide to the launching country whereas a tactical nuke carried on an 18th century steamboat can go undetected...

Boats are limited to water, ICBMs aren't. Boats can only attack one target from non-optimal elevation, ICBMs can attack many targets from optimal elevation.

Originally Posted by jmcslob

Missile defense equals laser defense and Missile Shield equals wasted money...

One in the same.

Originally Posted by Steevo

Or you have transmitters aboard our higher flying GPS satellites that can jam the missiles guidance, and or hijack and override it.

Whatever they do is going to require the use of guidance, and unless they have planted enough people to transmit a local ground based path along the route they have to rely on other forms of radio communication, and as such it can be jammed, or you can lie to GPS devices by substituting data.

You can bet that the US has planned for such an issue, as some of the GPS base stations/receivers I play with at work have the ability to transmit/receive a pseudo location.

Everything is controlled by a computer programmed before launch:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D37D

Once the missile is launched, the guidance system cannot be changed or affected from the ground, a feature which prevents enemy interference with the planned trajectory of the missile.

There is no "hacking" it nor "overriding" it and ICBM guidence systems originate from the Cold War--before GPS. In fact, the original Minuteman missile had one of the most advanced computer systems in the world at the time.

[DrPepper]

Originally Posted by twilyth

directed energy weapons are a nice idea since they make short work of any decoy mirv's. The problem is that you're fighting the atmosphere. you have to punch through hundreds of miles of it and still have enough kick to do some damage.

Make a missile reflective and lasers won't do shit anyway.

Ford already pointed out ICBMs are a massive threat that's why the US still maintains their stockpile. Although CIWS and Sea Sparrow aren't always 100% effective although they are very impressive.

[FordGT90Concept]

Better than no defense at all. XD

[DrPepper]

Originally Posted by FordGT90Concept

Better than no defense at all. XD

I'm not saying if it isn't 100% get rid of it.

[jmcslob]

http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/...abl/index.html
http://www.mda.mil/
http://www.spacewar.com/Ray_Guns.html
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/R41526.pdf


Here is some reading...Obama didn't simply cut funding...He followed the advice as any president would of the MDA...

Again, this is nothing more than stupid headline grabbing by Romney...he needs to shy away from national defense and foreign policy unless he wants to lose by a landslide...

[FordGT90Concept]

I quote myself:

Originally Posted by FordGT90Concept

Is Obama's policies towards North Korea working? No. Has Obama cut missile defense spending? Yes. Where's the stupidity on Romney's part? I don't see any.

Romney is scoring points in what he said, Obama is not.