Posted on 04/14/2024 4:36:17 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Those of us of a certain age will remember a time, some 40 years ago now, when President Ronald Reagan advocated the Strategic Defense Initiative, Project High Frontier, and various other related programs, all built around the basic concept that we should have defenses against incoming missile attacks.
Throughout all of human history, military preparedness has involved both offensive and defensive elements. An army might have swords and longbows for offense, while being equipped with shields for defense. Cannons and cannonballs made up the offense, fortresses and moats provided a defense.
Thus it has been for thousands of years, but this common sense approach was inexplicably stopped cold -- with the dawn of the nuclear age.
All of a sudden, our betters came to the conclusion that we should not try to defend ourselves against intercontinental ballistic missiles, nuclear bombs, and similar ultra-modern threats. Instead of designing a defense, overwhelming arsenals and the fear of retaliatory strikes should be enough to dissuade any foe from launching such an attack.
President Reagan came to the conclusion that this theory -- Mutually Assured Destruction, known as MAD -- was exactly that, and a major thrust of his presidency was an effort to put an end to such a dangerous policy, once and for all.
The president believed that if America had an offense, it ought to have a defense as well. Period.
In the budget battles and political fights of the 1980s, President Reagan was never fully successful in implementing the multiphase missile defenses that he advocated, but even so, we were finally able to break free of the foolishness of the anti-ballistic missile (ABM) treaty,
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
This commitment to a robust defense posture –- specifically against incoming missiles -- was among the key drivers in forcing the collapse of our then-greatest enemy, the Soviet Union.
Our friend Israel embraced the technology with vigor, and Israel has used several of these tools to defend itself against its many enemies ever since.
Back in the 1980s, when this was a serious topic of discussion in American political dialogue, we made the point that such defenses don’t have to be 100% effective. Even if they are just 20% or 30% effective, the knowledge that some portion of incoming shots would be rendered ineffective should be enough to put doubt in the minds of our enemies. You don’t need 100% effectiveness; you just need enough to make it harder for your enemy to know how big an attack he needs, to be certain of success. And the more effective your defense, the harder it is for your enemy to perform that calculation.
At press time, Israel’s response to Iran’s attacks were still running 99% effective. That’s incredible.
The left has always been insane. Isaac Asimov, Mr. Sci-Fi himself, in his zeal to disagree with Reagan, took the astounding position that SDI would never work.
Beclowning himself and his decades of forward-thinking ideas for the sake of his political standing.
A test to see what they would do against their stupid drones. Spend a billion dollars. Just from Iran. Now they know Israel's response to what they did, and they will be prepared later to do REAL damage next time. Or they are planning on bankrupting our side with cheap drones and rockets that may not even be armed just to waste resources.
This is good news then, Israel doesn’t need our money or our troops anymore, right?
Iran thumbed it’s nose at The US. No one fears us under Biden
Hi
In 1983 president Reagan sunk the entire Iranian navy.
Just saying.
5.56mm
I recall a few years ago a false civil defense alert was broadcast in Hawaii warning of an imminent missile strike presumably from North Korea. The panicked populace of Hawaii knew they were defenseless and were prepared to be annihilated. Had Reagan’s much maligned “ Stars Wars” missile defense system been in place and improved with decades of new technology attacks by rogue states or even China or Russia could be largely repelled.
Was wondering how long it would take for the Israel-haters to show up ...
You’re right, passive defense is a sure way to lose. Israel needs to state unequivocally that there for every missile or drone launched at Israel that it will send 10 in response regardless of whether Israel shoots down incoming missiles or not.
They have their own nation now, we don't need to babysit them anymore.
When I was trying to figure out if SDI was possible I decided to watch the Russians reaction to it since they were a nation of missiles and scientists and I wasn’t, they were totally freaked out, I have never seen them so freaked out over something as they were SDI, which told me they thought we could do it.
Nonsense! Biden and friends have provided billions to Iran and the Palestinians. The money has been used to fund their war against Israel. Providing arms and defense to Israel partially compensates for this treachery.
I believe that there's an "Aegis Ashore" location in Kauai, Hawaii. A "test station", allegedly.
The technolgy at the time was wholly inadequate in the first place. THere have been enormous advances since then. Much of what we are seeing now only became technically feasible in the last few years.
With the technology of the 1980s, SDI was not possible. And we knew it wasn’t. But we released fabricated test results that indicated we were close to making it work. And the Soviets, with their awe of Western technology that bordered on cargo cult status, were convinced that we were hiding our true capabilities that were beyond what we released. That was Reagan’s true genius with SDI. He goaded the USSR into bankrupting itself in trying to chase a fantasy.
Now the research done since then has yielded results. It’s just that in 1984, it was all an illusion.
Ukraine is using S-300 missile defense system to defend their skies, that was a Soviet era system that’s still effective. The only problem is that they’re running out of ammunition.
“ They have their own nation now, we don’t need to babysit them anymore.”
What do you think the Israelis would do if they genuinely believed there was an imminent existential threat to them?
That’s right. They’d use their nukes. So maybe, just maybe, it’s a good idea to make it if such a threat were to appear we would assist them so they wouldn’t have to use those nuclear weapons.
I’m just recognizing the reality of the situation. That doesn’t mean I like it.
L
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.