Missile Defense: Who said the Cold War was over?
p style = "text-align: justify; "> The implementation of an anti-missile shield in Europe raises many questions and justified. Against which the shield is really directed? His presence is there a need for European security or would it not attiseur tensions? Is it technically reliable? There seems to be no single answer but a multitude of convergence of interest from around the globe, and this article is intended to provide a simplified view of the real issues james oberg behind this project. The ABM Anti-Ballistic Missile
The same concept can destroy any nuclear strike calls into question james oberg the very principle of deterrence. If I know all keystrokes that will target will be intercepted me, nothing prevents me to strike first. Right out of the Second World War, the two giants that were the USA and the USSR are dispatched to create a way to destroy the bombs in flight in case of strikes aimed. The principle is simple: once you type detected by satellites or advanced on the ground or at sea radar, missile trajectory is calculated. Are then triggered in response sending missile defense supposed to intercept the warhead in flight and detonate; depending on the type of missile sent, the distance james oberg traveled, the answer may be different.
There are several ways to categorize these missile defense. The most common james oberg way is in scope; but it is also common to see this categorization based on when the missile is sent, or when it will intercept the missile in question; he must know that there are three phases in the flight of a missile, during which they may be destroyed. The pushing phase, very short, and thus requires having interceptor missiles in close proximity of the location shooting (usually a direct presence in enemy territory by air or underwater, for example), then the intermediate phase (which is outer for ICBM (Intercontinental Ballistic Missile), and where the easiest way to assess its cap), then the re-entry phase, also very short, and that involves some risk for interception: missiles can be set to release several nuclear warheads, decoys to confuse the anti-missile defense, and then a nuclear explosion in the atmosphere are always some "spillover" ...
Realizing early on the potential risk posed the existence of a defense system against ballistic missiles in the fragile nuclear balance that existed james oberg in the time of the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union signed the treaty in 1972 SALT (Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty). This treaty was designed to correlate the limited number of offensive and defensive missiles, and thus prohibited the manufacture of anti-ballistic missiles, 100 launchers and 100 except ABM missiles for a single site chosen by each of the two camps. The USSR chose to protect Moscow and the USA, Grand Forks, North Dakota, area launch intercontinental missiles ... In 1979, the treaty was completed in Vienna (SALT II), and each tries to ensure respect from the other capping sites terrestrial launch, the number james oberg of strategic bombers, the number of strategic missiles, etc. The same desire has continued even after the fall of the USSR, since the START I and II, respectively, adopted in 1991 and 1993, provide them more than a limitation but a reduction in the number of "strategic" missiles, echoing unilateral decisions of American and Russian presidents to reduce their workforce. There is no need to go into the technical james oberg data of different gears to these treaties (which must be added the SORT Treaty (Strategic Offensive Reduction Treaty), the START III treaty not ratified, etc.), but several analyzes echo the lack of clarity and control capability in those treaties.
Anyway, shortly after the attacks on the World Trade Center, the American government is reviewing its defense strategy and December 13, 2001, George W. Bush announced the withdrawal of the United States from the ABM Treaty to allow the establishment a new missile shield, given in their new emerging threats in this area (the Rogue States, james oberg rogue states like North Korea and Iran, and the terrorist threat). The treaty that had prevented the two giants to participate in "a defensive arms race & raq
p style = "text-align: justify; "> The implementation of an anti-missile shield in Europe raises many questions and justified. Against which the shield is really directed? His presence is there a need for European security or would it not attiseur tensions? Is it technically reliable? There seems to be no single answer but a multitude of convergence of interest from around the globe, and this article is intended to provide a simplified view of the real issues james oberg behind this project. The ABM Anti-Ballistic Missile
The same concept can destroy any nuclear strike calls into question james oberg the very principle of deterrence. If I know all keystrokes that will target will be intercepted me, nothing prevents me to strike first. Right out of the Second World War, the two giants that were the USA and the USSR are dispatched to create a way to destroy the bombs in flight in case of strikes aimed. The principle is simple: once you type detected by satellites or advanced on the ground or at sea radar, missile trajectory is calculated. Are then triggered in response sending missile defense supposed to intercept the warhead in flight and detonate; depending on the type of missile sent, the distance james oberg traveled, the answer may be different.
There are several ways to categorize these missile defense. The most common james oberg way is in scope; but it is also common to see this categorization based on when the missile is sent, or when it will intercept the missile in question; he must know that there are three phases in the flight of a missile, during which they may be destroyed. The pushing phase, very short, and thus requires having interceptor missiles in close proximity of the location shooting (usually a direct presence in enemy territory by air or underwater, for example), then the intermediate phase (which is outer for ICBM (Intercontinental Ballistic Missile), and where the easiest way to assess its cap), then the re-entry phase, also very short, and that involves some risk for interception: missiles can be set to release several nuclear warheads, decoys to confuse the anti-missile defense, and then a nuclear explosion in the atmosphere are always some "spillover" ...
Realizing early on the potential risk posed the existence of a defense system against ballistic missiles in the fragile nuclear balance that existed james oberg in the time of the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union signed the treaty in 1972 SALT (Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty). This treaty was designed to correlate the limited number of offensive and defensive missiles, and thus prohibited the manufacture of anti-ballistic missiles, 100 launchers and 100 except ABM missiles for a single site chosen by each of the two camps. The USSR chose to protect Moscow and the USA, Grand Forks, North Dakota, area launch intercontinental missiles ... In 1979, the treaty was completed in Vienna (SALT II), and each tries to ensure respect from the other capping sites terrestrial launch, the number james oberg of strategic bombers, the number of strategic missiles, etc. The same desire has continued even after the fall of the USSR, since the START I and II, respectively, adopted in 1991 and 1993, provide them more than a limitation but a reduction in the number of "strategic" missiles, echoing unilateral decisions of American and Russian presidents to reduce their workforce. There is no need to go into the technical james oberg data of different gears to these treaties (which must be added the SORT Treaty (Strategic Offensive Reduction Treaty), the START III treaty not ratified, etc.), but several analyzes echo the lack of clarity and control capability in those treaties.
Anyway, shortly after the attacks on the World Trade Center, the American government is reviewing its defense strategy and December 13, 2001, George W. Bush announced the withdrawal of the United States from the ABM Treaty to allow the establishment a new missile shield, given in their new emerging threats in this area (the Rogue States, james oberg rogue states like North Korea and Iran, and the terrorist threat). The treaty that had prevented the two giants to participate in "a defensive arms race & raq
No comments:
Post a Comment