19.09.2009, 18:44
Erich schrieb:wie intensiv stinken die iranischen Raketen denn, wenn sie bis nach Europa oder gar in den USA noch gerochen werden sollen??
Da ich ohne Rechtschreibprogramm schrieb und du weißt das Deutsch nicht meine Muttersprache ist musst du solche Flüchtigkeitsfehler verzechen. Aber Erich warum antwortest du denn nicht auf die Problematik, ist es vielleicht weil du keine Ahnung hast wenn das so ist und du nicht Sinnvolles dazu Beitragen kannst weil ich dich an die Wand genagelt habe dann halt doch einfach die Klappe oder sähe deinen Fehler ein, Danke. :wink:
Wenn du was seriöses zu melden hast außer bullshit, so sag mal was zum Thema wie du mit den SM;3 die Iranischen Mittle und Langstrecken Raketen den bitte abfangen willst. :wink:
Dazu nochmal:
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS155577+18-Sep-2009+PRN20090918">http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRel ... RN20090918</a><!-- m -->
Zitat:The Defense of the Eastern and Southeastern United States is at Risk with new Missile....
The Defense of the Eastern and Southeastern United States is at Risk with new Missile Defense Plan
WASHINGTON, Sept. 18 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Riki Ellison, President and Chairman of the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance (MDAA)
<!-- w --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.missiledefenseadvocacy.org">www.missiledefenseadvocacy.org</a><!-- w --> details his thoughts on the new missile defense plan announced yesterday by the Department of Defense. His analysis and comments are as follows:
President Barack Obama and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates made a historic announcement yesterday to rescind on previous agreements with the governments of the Czech Republic and Poland to host a missile defense system that would protect the United States and parts of Europe. This decision places the Eastern and Southeastern portions of the U.S. at risk from long-range ballistic missile threats by not protecting those regions as equally as the rest of the country is now currently protected with long-range missile defenses. No realistic solution or alternative was introduced by the President and the Secretary of Defense to replace the long-range protection to our country's Eastern and Southeastern regions provided by those international agreements that are now voided.
The "new missile defense architecture" proposed by the President and the
Secretary of Defense relies on the current and future development of sea- and land-based Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) coupled with the Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system and the Patriot point defense system to defend our forward based troops as well as friends and allies in Europe and throughout the world. We support the President's "new missile defense architecture" for its mobility, adaptability, integration, volume, and cost sharing with our allies for protection of U.S. deployed forces and our allies from the growing present threat of short and medium-range ballistic missiles.
However, from a military perspective this "new missile defense architecture" cannot defend the U.S. Homeland from a long-range ballistic missiles; it also cannot defend the two primary missile defense and early warning radars in Fylingdales, England and Thule, Greenland from long-range ballistic missiles.
Today, the only system that has proven results to intercept long-range
ballistic missiles is the currently deployed Ground Based Interceptors (GBI).
The SM-3 is specifically designed, developed and tested to intercept short- to medium-range missiles not the much faster and higher altitude long-range ballistic missiles. These SM-3 missiles technically cannot intercept long-range missiles in a real world live engagement and there is no validation or proof of concept that indicates otherwise...........
Nun Ratlos, kommt jetzt wieder ein Bullshit Artikel oder willst du dich der Technische Realität fügen ? Zukünftige Kommentare von dir die nichts zum Thema gehören, werde ich einfach mit einen lol kommentieren.