Nato's missile defence shield 'up and running'

[Gerald]

At its summit in Chicago this weekend, Nato is set to announce its new ballistic missile defence system has reached what it calls "interim operational capability".

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/60312000/gif/_60312123_us_missile_def_slide01_624_2.gif

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/60312000/gif/_60312124_us_missile_def_slide02_624_2.gif

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/60312000/gif/_60312125_us_missile_def_slide03_624_2.gif

At its summit in Chicago this weekend, Nato is set to announce its new ballistic missile defence system has reached what it calls "interim operational capability".

This means that the first phase of the controversial scheme to defend Nato territory against ballistic missile attack will be operational.

But Nato's plans have many critics.

Some wonder if the system will work - and question whether there really is a missile threat to Nato territory at all.

Others fear it will poison relations between Russia and the West, delivering little real strategic benefit.

Nato has watched the spread of ballistic missile technology with growing unease.

If there is a potential ballistic missile threat to Nato countries then it can be summed up in one word - Iran.However, a leading expert on missile defence technology, Professor Theodore Postol of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, believes that this potential threat has been much overstated.

"The fundamental long-term threat from Iran is from nuclear weapons. But for now Iran does not have the bomb. A ballistic missile without a nuclear weapon," he says, "is like a terrorist bomber without an explosive vest."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18093664


Note: 20 May 2012 Last updated at 01:10 GMT

[Seth8530]

Missiles can still be dangerous without nuclear warheads in them.

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

Missiles can still be dangerous without nuclear warheads in them.Agreed. In case nukes are not available Iranians can for example just bolt a can of nuclear waste with some RDX into the top of rocket.

[Catfish]

So they build up a shield in Europe (sic!), against non-existent Iranian long range missiles.
Who did they say are they afraid of ?
But maybe the south pole is also an option ?

Has anyone of the project enjoyed ANY geographical education ?
:rotfl2:

[Osmium Steele]

So they build up a shield in Europe (sic!), against non-existent Iranian long range missiles.


The point is to close the barn doors BEFORE the horses get out.

[Gerald]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-18141605#sa-ns_mchannel=rss&ns_source=PublicRSS20-sa

Note: Update record,21 May 2012 Last updated at 12:38 GMT

[Jimbuna]

The point is to close the barn doors BEFORE the horses get out.

Rgr that.

[Hawk66]

"The fundamental long-term threat from Iran is from nuclear weapons. But for now Iran does not have the bomb. A ballistic missile without a nuclear weapon," he says, "is like a terrorist bomber without an explosive vest.



So he'd like to wait until they or any other similar country has the bomb and once they have it there is the 'little' drawback that you have to wait for a (then justified ?) missile defense is designed, implemented and tested.

Awesome...my only hope is that not all MIT profs have such an understanding of modern logic :D

[Betonov]

I'd sure love to see one of those missiles intercept a missile targeted agains a russian city :DL And then even more love to see Putins face afterwards :D

[Jimbuna]

I'd sure love to see one of those missiles intercept a missile targeted agains a russian city :DL And then even more love to see Putins face afterwards :D

http://www.anorak.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/putin_missile.jpg