Replies

I've lurked on Free republic for a year now, but it's time for me to actually create a sn and say something... LS: "It is enought to point out that Reagan KNEW that the MX was obsolete when he deployed it in the early 1980s, but he did so both to fulfill a campaign promise and to just simply "add numbers." --The MX was never obsolete, in fact it was just about the only truly survivable land based deterrant we had. Rail basing them, the "shell" game, all gave our forces more validity in the eyes of a potental attacker. The pure fact that the Russian military copied our idea and now has a substantial force of MX-ski's (Topol-M) should say enough..... "Fixed, land-based missiles in the 1980s were obsolete in that they could be easily targeted, unlike sea-based assets." ---Land based missiles like the MX were always set to L.O.W. (launch on warning), the russians would be targeting empty silos. Also, the MX was designed to be a rail mobile system. "The Trident II missile, with GPS, was FAR superior in Hard-Target-Kill-Capacity than the MX, and now, with better targeting, is even more so." ----No, I'm afraid you're wrong on this, the CEP of the MX system is far superior to any of the Tridents. So, for that matter, is the loft capacity of the MX vs. Trident (IE more warheads on the MX's). It's moot at any point. Search the I-net about P.A.L. codes being removed from the subs. They need the ELF emergency action message to launch, without one (which would obviously be the case in a pre-emptive decapitory strike [target fall in 6 minutes from an enemy sub], they could not fire the missiles...even if they got them out of the tubes, they would not detonate...BY DESIGN ""Moreover, as we have seen, cruise missiles and RPGs are becoming far more effective than any fixed missile ever was. "" ---This is great, but not true. Yes cruise missiles platforms are generally harder to totally wipe out than a land based platform (or the sub for that matter), but the sick, sad truth of it is that all the tomahawk-N (nuclear-tipped) missiles have been removed from our active navy's inventory. That means a refurb, re-trit, and reload time of minimum 24 hours (from storage to ship). That's assuming we have the warning time, viable tritium stocks, etc. That's PER MISSILE. Don't forget the fact that the CIS has a completely viable, operational, and effective ABM system. This system has been under constant expansion/refinment/updating since the 1960's. The U.S. was the only country who actually held to the 1972 ABM treaty. We're on the precipice here. No tinfoil about it...

"Search the I-net about P.A.L. codes being removed from the subs. They need the ELF emergency action message to launch, without one (which would obviously be the case in a pre-emptive decapitory strike [target fall in 6 minutes from an enemy sub], they could not fire the missiles...even if they got them out of the tubes, they would not detonate...BY DESIGN"

I remember when Slick ordered that castration of the submarines -- has Bush rescinded it yet?

Bump and Lookie here...bookmark this baby.