[AFPhys]

I believe that these Russian tests and problems with them are highly indicative of how effective the US SDI/ missile defense systems have become. The Russians are apparently trying to perfect a different type of missile guidance/ flight path in an attempt to elude the US defenses. It is costing them dearly to do so.

That they are having difficulty should be very encouraging to everybody who is trying to evaluate the effectiveness of the US national missile defense. Clearly, other less capable nations will have even greater difficulty developing systems that are able to elude our defenses.

This shows we're really making progress, and that forcing other nations to react to our defensive initiatives will cost them dearly, and that any such reactions are highly likely to prove ineffective.

[Tolsti]

When we have systems like airborne laser and so on, I don't think there is much they can really do. The laser can track targets attempting to evade.

I'd really like to see a large fleet of ABL's up and running.

[Robert A Cook PE]

But for some "funny" reason, the democrat/liberals/socialists/international communists complain that making the Soviet's job harder puts us in more danger ....

Funny, isn't it.

A mythical "ability to decoy the ABM" and "evade the ABM by changing trajectories during decent while still hitting the target" are VALID reasons NOT to create an ABM system that would require the mythical/theoretical evasion to be created.

But a simple ballistic dumb trajectory over the pole is "safe" ....