Article

2006-03-05 Home Front: WoT

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by lotp 2006-03-05 00:00|| || Front Page|| [3 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 I hope they mean neutron and bunker buster warheads as well as the Popular Science weapons.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-03-05 17:03|| 2006-03-05 17:03|| Front Page Top

#2 Me too, but there's that pesky business about Congress ....

Posted by lotp 2006-03-05 17:15|| 2006-03-05 17:15|| Front Page Top

#3 Yup. That's why we'll still be flying the x-130yz at the dawn of the 22nd century.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-03-05 17:19|| 2006-03-05 17:19|| Front Page Top

#4 A glaring weakness in GMD is its perennial focii on mostly above-water BMD capabilities - the USA needs to have underwater BMD as well. The Net right now like to report or comment on hyper-velocity, "super-cavitating" submarine torpedoes and submersible UV's. US GMD needs to defend against underwater or surface-skimming high-velocity, MIRV/MRV-capable, independ maneuver, "fire-and'forget", "brilliant/genius" land attack standoff weapons. EVEN THE RUSSIANS AND CHINESE THEMSELVES ADMIT TO PRIORITIZING UNDERWATER WARFARE AND HI-TECH UW PLATFORMS/
SYSTEMS AGS US GMD-BMD.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2006-03-05 21:25|| 2006-03-05 21:25|| Front Page Top

23:55 JosephMendiola
23:45 JosephMendiola
23:36 C-Low
23:24 Sherry
23:17 Captain America
23:15 Captain America
23:13 2b
23:08 Frank G
23:06 JosephMendiola
23:06 C-Low
22:56 incarnate of lee atwater
22:55 JosephMendiola
22:53 C-Low
22:40 Frank G
22:38 Danking70
22:38 SteveS
22:38 Angineth Glaviper9578
22:34 anymouse
22:30 Angineth Glaviper9578
22:25 3dc
22:02 .com
22:00 .com
21:57 .com
21:56 SteveS