Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 dogma wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
If anything the ability to intercept only shortens the time available, because it will never be 100% effective and interception must occur well before the time of impact.

Which is not the equivalent of:

 Peregrine wrote:
Missile defense shortens the time to decide because you have to decide whether to shoot down or not.

Fine. Since your initial statement seems to have been badly worded and confusing, I'll let you clarify: how exactly does having missile defense shorten the time available to make a decision about how to respond?

I'm in favour of this. It'll give the US experience in building anti-missile defences, which is crucial for Western Europe since it'd neutralise the threat from Russia, whose missile arsenal is Europe's only real threat.

 Peregrine wrote:

Fine. Since your initial statement seems to have been badly worded and confusing, I'll let you clarify: how exactly does having missile defense shorten the time available to make a decision about how to respond?

I graciously accept his Grace's will in allowing me to respond, but I've already explained how.

 dogma wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Fine. Since your initial statement seems to have been badly worded and confusing, I'll let you clarify: how exactly does having missile defense shorten the time available to make a decision about how to respond?

I graciously accept his Grace's will in allowing me to respond, but I've already explained how.

You haven't explained anything.

Hasn't pretty much everything NK has launched gone wrong anyway, even without the Americans shooting it?

 SilverMK2 wrote:
Hasn't pretty much everything NK has launched gone wrong anyway, even without the Americans shooting it?

Just about, they either malfunction or get shot down, and for the most part even the ones that "work" apparently under perform. Sounds like a rough friday night for a Uni student doesn't it?