Support NeoGAF

[whytemyke]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/02/18/limiting.lawsuits.ap/index.html

Here you guys go. Tons of new rules for lawsuits. I'm not a big fan of it, but whatever. It basically is built to take away state sovereignty and support businesses, showing the neo-con basis of it.

It should be especially relevant here, because it'll directly effect that class action suit brought by EA employees against EA.

 

[bishoptl]

Not quite.

While businesses failed to get the measure to apply to suits already in the courts, Bush offered immediate help by signing the bill Friday.

 

[whytemyke]

meh. yeah.

still a sucky law.

 

[Drensch]

Makers of vioxx: "Yeah, go Bush!"

 

[LinesInTheSand]

thank god. great job.

 

[Outdoor Miner]

Good thing those republicans are fighting for states. NUH UH MR BIG GOVERNMENT.

Oh wait...

 

[fart]

thank god. great job.

PHEW, no more corporate liability. we're definitely safer now. thanks dubya!

 

[sprsk]

PHEW, no more corporate liability. we're definitely safer now. thanks dubya!

the sad thing is that most of the people happy about this law think that all lawsuits of this nature are "i spilled coffee on myself"

 

[GG-Duo]

It's only the middle of Febuary, and we have had

- the Iran thing
- the social security thing
- this bill

the next 4 years are going to fucking suck, and this forum can only react by cynical jokey comments.

 

[Hitokage]

the sad thing is that most of the people happy about this law think that all lawsuits of this nature are "i spilled coffee on myself"

And even that case had merit.

 

[Phoenix]

the sad thing is that most of the people happy about this law think that all lawsuits of this nature are "i spilled coffee on myself"

Yes, and unfortunately the Republican party has been very good exploiting the sheer stupidity of that base over and over and over and over again.

Bush and other Republicans say greedy lawyers have taken advantage of the state class-action suit system by filing frivolous cases in places where they know they can win big dollar verdicts. Meanwhile, those lawyers' clients get only small sums or coupons giving them discounts for products of the company they just sued, GOP lawmakers contend.

House Majority Whip Roy Blunt, R-Missouri, said that moving those cases to federal court will ensure that state judges will no longer "routinely approve settlements in which the lawyers receive large fees and the class members receive virtually nothing."

This part of the bill, however, is true and pure gold.

 

[Outdoor Miner]

It's been a pretty fucked up month I'll say. I don't like one goddamn thing Bush AND Congress are doing or are looking to doing. The other shitty bill coming through being the one pushing censorship fines up to $500,000 with no cap.

Let's not even talk about that atrocious budget, christ almighty. You're cutting environmental and education funding, yet you can't restrain from increasing the defense budget? I'm not even talking about a decrease in spending, just keep it leveled FFS!

Nice to know billions of dollars are going into the shittech known as the Missile Defense System, which btw, failed it's most recent test.

*sigh*

 

[Drensch]

the next 4 years are going to fucking suck, and this forum can only react by cynical jokey comments.

You got a better idea?

 

[Diablos]

Oh great, let's slam the idea of a class action lawsuit.. It almost sounds like they want no one to speak for themselves in a corproate environment.

 

[KilledByBill]

Bush and other Republicans say greedy lawyers have taken advantage of the state class-action suit system by filing frivolous cases in places where they know they can win big dollar verdicts.

What the hell is this supposed to mean exactly? If the case is, by definition, frivolous then the judge isn't going to just grant a multi-million dollar verdict and even if one did it wouldn't survive the higher courts.

But I guess Bush wants to make sure the judges deciding these cases were appointed by him and that they're using his version of frivolous.

 

[Brannon]

Everything this guy does makes me grow question marks out of my head. Painful, bloody question marks that pulsate streams of pure liquid super-concentrated confusion out of their pores. And it isn't anywhere near over yet.

 

[Hitokage]

Frivolous lawsuits = Nasty things that attack honest, hardworking Americans
Activist judges = Nasty people who support them and other things that we don't like.

 

[Phoenix]

Nice to know billions of dollars are going into the shittech known as the Missile Defense System, which btw, failed it's most recent test.

*sigh*

Yeah because we all know that it should be an easy to develop system that shouldn't fail during development. Wonder how many other technological developments didn't have setbacks...

while I think the whole idea of hitting a missile with a missile is flawed compared to more direct energy weapon solutions, the line of reasoning presented is terrible.

 

[whytemyke]

the army's Air Defense Artillery is actually working on tech to mount a laser on a satellite over earth to deflect missiles incoming, instead of using missiles to hit missiles.

the tech isn't supposed to be available for another 5 years or so. Personally, I think they should open it up (and NASA, too) to private industry.

On the flip side, or what I like to call "main point", I'd just like to chime in that apparently they're now working on legislation in congress, as well, that will completely cap lawsuit claims. people mistake the difference between stupid lawsuits and needed ones, and because this is lumping them all together, its just one more point that proves that people will always give up a little more of their freedoms to feel more secure, and the government can fuck with us anytime they want.

 

[Pudding Tame]

Pheonix, the problem most people have with MDS has to do with 3 things.

1.) Technology is nowhere near ready to be effective, the tests that have been run so far on MDS have been so highly scripted, they might as well be called open-book tests. With the only real varibles from test to test being time of launch, and missle counter measure payload. (Both known before hand) The fact that they've failed so many tests as is under those conditions, is cause for concern. Especially considering this system is supposed to protect us from a surprise nuclear attack from anywhere at anytime in the world.

2.) It's a money-pit. For every million (if that) dollars spent on Rouge States to create counter-measures, we'll have to spend tens to even hundreds of millions of dollars to counter their counter-measures.

3.) The president basically removed any kind of Congressional or Pentagon oversight of the project by declaring it ready to be deployed (even though that's nowhere near the truth). Effectively removing checks and balences that are supposed to call for accountability and kill bad projects if needed.

The threat posed by a Rouge State or terrorist nuclear missle launch is actually very small, though President Bush hasn't been helping things. The money being used for MDS could be used for more pressing or practical needs, both in the military and for social spending.

Oh yeah, this lawsuit thing sucks too. Especially the part about capping lawyers fees to hours worked, sure it sounds good on the surface, but it's pretty insideous.

 

[tetsuoxb]

The threat posed by a Rouge State or terrorist nuclear missle launch is actually very small, though President Bush hasn't been helping things. The money being used for MDS could be used for more pressing or practical needs, both in the military and for social spending.

Oh yeah, this lawsuit thing sucks too. Especially the part about capping lawyers fees to hours worked, sure it sounds good on the surface, but it's pretty insideous.

1) A small threat is enough for me to want to spend money to stop it. You must also remember that there are probably capabilities to the system that remain classified. Just as how some of the more advanced UAV projects being developed are still classified. Anyways, considering I am currently typing from within range of any ballistic missle North Korea has, Ill take the missle defense system anyway I can get it.

Any country which would send back remains of an abductee, knowing full well that a DNA test would prove them to be fake, is pretty dangerous to me.

2) Do you know how John Edwards made his money? Basically by taking large portions of class action judgements/settlements in lieu of hours work. The capping is one of the few things I like about the bill, because it refocuses lawyers away from what is essentially multi-million dollar ambulance chasing.

 

[Pudding Tame]

1) A small threat is enough for me to want to spend money to stop it. You must also remember that there are probably capabilities to the system that remain classified. Just as how some of the more advanced UAV projects being developed are still classified. Anyways, considering I am currently typing from within range of any ballistic missle North Korea has, Ill take the missle defense system anyway I can get it.

Tetsuoxb, I'm typing from Japan, way within range of North Korea, so that card won't work with me.

What classified capabilities, It has trouble hitting missles that have been fired from the same place to the same target on the same trajectory in every test.

Even if North Korea launched their entire arsenal of nukes, they would be signing their death warrent, they along with every other country in the world have no way of stopping a retaliatory strike from us, we could turn all of North Korea to glass and still have hundreds if not thousands of nukes left.

As for terrorists, it's easier for them simply to smuggle nukes into the US than to buy or steal an ICBM. Our borders are still nowhere close to being secure and yet more money is poured into MDS.

2) Do you know how John Edwards made his money? Basically by taking large portions of class action judgements/settlements in lieu of hours work. The capping is one of the few things I like about the bill, because it refocuses lawyers away from what is essentially multi-million dollar ambulance chasing.

Yes, but you are ignoring the fact that in a lot of legitimate class action cases especially in environmental and pharmicutical cases, lawyers have to do more than look at law books. They have to hire experts and commission studies, which cost money. By capping settlements to hours worked, it limits oppertunity for them to recoup the money they spent for those experts and studies, thereby making their case.

This allows companies at fault to have more leverage in turning the screws on the plaintiff by making a take it or leave it settlement offers or taking the case to trial where they could stall for years, or have any number of other things happen.

What this effect will probably have is that with no way to get that money back if a client chooses to settle, they simply won't bother spending the money, thereby making their clients cases weaker. Like I said before, it's insideous.

Tetsuoxb, I too believe that their are too many frivolous (sp?) cases in the system, the problem with this law is that it simply isn't equitable and the public isn't well searved by it. The law is basicaly a GOP blow job for big business, and a screw you to everyone else.

 

[tetsuoxb]

What classified capabilities, It has trouble hitting missles that have been fired from the same place to the same target on the same trajectory in every test.

Even if North Korea launched their entire arsenal of nukes, they would be signing their death warrent, they along with every other country in the world have no way of stopping a retaliatory strike from us, we could turn all of North Korea to glass and still have hundreds if not thousands of nukes left.

As for terrorists, it's easier for them simply to smuggle nukes into the US than to buy or steal an ICBM. Our borders are still nowhere close to being secure and yet more money is poured into MDS.

What classified capabilities - ones that you and I dont know about maybe? I agree the collider system is not necessarily the best way to go... but the problems they have had so far are more to do with secondary systems failing than the underlying technology being proven unreliable. Granted any failure is no good, but the problems will be fixed.

Yes, but you are ignoring the fact that in a lot of legitimate class action cases especially in environmental and pharmicutical cases, lawyers have to do more than look at law books. They have to hire experts and commission studies, which cost money. By capping settlements to hours worked, it limits oppertunity for them to recoup the money they spent for those experts and studies, thereby making their case.

This allows companies at fault to have more leverage in turning the screws on the plaintiff by making a take it or leave it settlement offers or taking the case to trial where they could stall for years, or have any number of other things happen.

What this effect will probably have is that with no way to get that money back if a client chooses to settle, they simply won't bother spending the money, thereby making their clients cases weaker. Like I said before, it's insideous.

Tetsuoxb, I too believe that their are too many frivolous (sp?) cases in the system, the problem with this law is that it simply isn't equitable and the public isn't well searved by it. The law is basicaly a GOP blow job for big business, and a screw you to everyone else.

Could you quote the relevant passage of the bill?

I havent read the bill, but I would be almost positive that allowances are made for expert witnesses, etc. If it does not, then I will agree with you. However, I would suspect the actual language probably has something to do with actual legal costs and not hours billed. A well written bill would limit lawyers from opting for a percentage of settlement, but still allow them to recoup expenditures and hours.

 

[Pudding Tame]

What classified capabilities - ones that you and I dont know about maybe? I agree the collider system is not necessarily the best way to go... but the problems they have had so far are more to do with secondary systems failing than the underlying technology being proven unreliable. Granted any failure is no good, but the problems will be fixed.

Again, even if every thing worked perfectley in the tests, the tests are so far removed from real world condidtions that it's hard to gauge how successful, if at all they would be in practical use. Also these tests do nothing in regards to practical counter-measures. MDS is still very pie in the sky, and sucking-up money that could go to better causes.

This link is from a site that is anti-MDS but is very fair in it's analisys, it is a chronolgy of MDS tests, it has yet to be updated for the latest test.

Could you quote the relevant passage of the bill?

I havent read the bill, but I would be almost positive that allowances are made for expert witnesses, etc. If it does not, then I will agree with you. However, I would suspect the actual language probably has something to do with actual legal costs and not hours billed. A well written bill would limit lawyers from opting for a percentage of settlement, but still allow them to recoup expenditures and hours.

There are (not counting coupon settlements) but there is a loophole that could be exploited if companies lowball plaintiffs.

From SEC. 6

(A) the fees and expenses awarded to counsel in connection with a class action settlement appropriately reflect the extent to which counsel succeeded in obtaining full redress for the injuries alleged and the time, expense, and risk that counsel devoted to the litigation;

(B) the class members on whose behalf the settlement is proposed are the primary beneficiaries of the settlement;

It's never clarified if the settlement redress is based on the settlement for the entire group, or per person. Either way it can be exploited, more if it's per person.

 

[whytemyke]

damn... I want to find more info on this other bill supposedly in house to completely cap payments at exact numbers. if I find it i'll post it here.

 

[gigapower]

well there goes the exploding power cord lawsuit I was just getting ready to file against bill.

but in all seriousness, Federal judges don't want to handle these cases as they don't have time, so all they are going to do is either toss them all out or rush them through and not give them the time that they deserve.

 

[Phoenix]

Pheonix, the problem most people have with MDS has to do with 3 things.

1.) Technology is nowhere near ready to be effective, the tests that have been run so far on MDS have been so highly scripted, they might as well be called open-book tests. With the only real varibles from test to test being time of launch, and missle counter measure payload. (Both known before hand) The fact that they've failed so many tests as is under those conditions, is cause for concern. Especially considering this system is supposed to protect us from a surprise nuclear attack from anywhere at anytime in the world.

Actually the system isn't designed to protect us from any attack at anytime in the world. The system is designed to protect us from a fairly limited 1-3 missile launch from the Asian theater which is why the missile bases are on the west coast Technology takes decades to become effective. The missiles that jets use today took decades to reach maturity such that you had assurance that it would be able to track and hit another aircraft from well beyond visual range. I have no doubt that the technology will eventually be able to meet its objectives, I just don't believe its the best system for the job. It does make a good last ditch system for missiles that make it past the other layers of ballistic missile defense that we're currently making.

2.) It's a money-pit. For every million (if that) dollars spent on Rouge States to create counter-measures, we'll have to spend tens to even hundreds of millions of dollars to counter their counter-measures.

For ever several million dollar tank, jet, etc. a missile that costs 20k can down it. Nothing new there.

3.) The president basically removed any kind of Congressional or Pentagon oversight of the project by declaring it ready to be deployed (even though that's nowhere near the truth). Effectively removing checks and balences that are supposed to call for accountability and kill bad projects if needed.

Need a source on that one. Hadn't seen anything along those lines.

The threat posed by a Rouge State or terrorist nuclear missle launch is actually very small, though President Bush hasn't been helping things. The money being used for MDS could be used for more pressing or practical needs, both in the military and for social spending.

The real question is do you wait for the threat to become large before you start trying to defend yourself? Logic dictates that if you have time to develop a system when you know a threat is small yet growing, that you should build that system so that it can be available when the threat is real and looming.

Oh yeah, this lawsuit thing sucks too. Especially the part about capping lawyers fees to hours worked, sure it sounds good on the surface, but it's pretty insideous.

I'm curious as to what would be insideous about it, please clarify that line of reasoning.

 

[Phoenix]

well there goes the exploding power cord lawsuit I was just getting ready to file against bill.

but in all seriousness, Federal judges don't want to handle these cases as they don't have time, so all they are going to do is either toss them all out or rush them through and not give them the time that they deserve.

Actually it will be interesting to see if the states themselves appeal this as unconstitutional as these are matters that the constitution gives to the states, not the federal government.

 

[Tarazet]

Did any of you read the article? You can still file class-action lawsuits against corporations, and if you're asking for less than $5 million, then it's the same as it was before. If you're asking for more, AND the corporation is not quartered in the same state as 1/3 of the defendants, it has to go to a federal court.

So if you're a Californian and want to sue Starbucks for $100 million, all you have to do is find someone from Washington who will go to court with you, and you can get your generous state court just like before. This is too weak.

 

[Phoenix]

If you're asking for more, AND the corporation is not quartered in the same state as 1/3 of the defendants, it has to go to a federal court.

Actually I've done more than that - I've actually read the bill itself. You might want to give it a read to learn its nuances.

`(2) The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action in which the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $5,000,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and is a class action in which--

`(A) [/b]any member of a class of plaintiffs is a citizen of a State different from any defendant;[/b]

`(B) any member of a class of plaintiffs is a foreign state or a citizen or subject of a foreign state and any defendant is a citizen of a State; or

`(C) any member of a class of plaintiffs is a citizen of a State and any defendant is a foreign state or a citizen or subject of a foreign state.


`(6) In any class action, the claims of the individual class members shall be aggregated to determine whether the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $5,000,000, exclusive of interest and costs.

Federal district courts get first dibs on anything over 5 million and that number is determined by combining ALL of the claims being made across the classes of the claim so essentially what you will end up with are 50 separate cases for smaller claims going into state courts as opposed to ONE class action claim in federal courts. This actually makes the problem worse, not better.

So if you're a Californian and want to sue Starbucks for $100 million, all you have to do is find someone from Washington who will go to court with you, and you can get your generous state court just like before. This is too weak.

False.

`(5) Paragraphs (2) through (4) shall not apply to any class action in which--

`(A) the primary defendants are States, State officials, or other governmental entities against whom the district court may be foreclosed from ordering relief; or

`(B) the number of members of all proposed plaintiff classes in the aggregate is less than 100.

 

[Tarazet]

...Then where the hell did the author of the article get the 1/3 figure from?? It seems to me that this is a totally different concept than what was reported.

I don't get what you mean by this resulting in 50 smaller cases, though. Aren't they all aggregated and considered as one case, and also tried as such?

 

[ShadowRed]

Actually the system isn't designed to protect us from any attack at anytime in the world. The system is designed to protect us from a fairly limited 1-3 missile launch from the Asian theater which is why the missile bases are on the west coast Technology takes decades to become effective. The missiles that jets use today took decades to reach maturity such that you had assurance that it would be able to track and hit another aircraft from well beyond visual range. I have no doubt that the technology will eventually be able to meet its objectives, I just don't believe its the best system for the job. It does make a good last ditch system for missiles that make it past the other layers of ballistic missile defense that we're currently making.

Do you actually think it's a prudent course of action to spend a billion plus on a system that will protect against a threat that most likely isn't going to occur? In all likelihood no nation is going to just launch 3 nukes at the US, with or without the shield. If an attack by ICBM is going to come it will be with several missiles with MIRV warheads along with decoys and countermeasures. This is like me spending a million dollars on protecting my home against being hit by a meteor when there is a near infinite chance that a meteor will directly strike my house, and if one did by chance hit it, it would be so big that the million dollar failsafe I built wouldn't do a thing to stop it. Wouldn't it make more sense to focus on diplomatically making sure that another country would never want to nuke you?

 

[Phoenix]

...Then where the hell did the author of the article get the 1/3 figure from?? It seems to me that this is a totally different concept than what was reported.

`(4) A district court shall decline to exercise jurisdiction under paragraph (2)--

`(A)(i) over a class action in which--

`(I) greater than two-thirds of the members of all proposed plaintiff classes in the aggregate are citizens of the State in which the action was originally filed;

`(II) at least 1 defendant is a defendant--

`(aa) from whom significant relief is sought by members of the plaintiff class;

`(bb) whose alleged conduct forms a significant basis for the claims asserted by the proposed plaintiff class; and

`(cc) who is a citizen of the State in which the action was originally filed; and

`(III) principal injuries resulting from the alleged conduct or any related conduct of each defendant were incurred in the State in which the action was originally filed; and

`(ii) during the 3-year period preceding the filing of that class action, no other class action has been filed asserting the same or similar factual allegations against any of the defendants on behalf of the same or other persons; or

`(B) two-thirds or more of the members of all proposed plaintiff classes in the aggregate, and the primary defendants, are citizens of the State in which the action was originally filed.

I don't get what you mean by this resulting in 50 smaller cases, though. Aren't they all aggregated and considered as one case, and also tried as such?

There is no requirement for class action cases to be brought in one large case. They are done so to generate a single class action settlement as that's good for all parties. However now lawyers in each of the 50 states will just file seperately in each of their cases in order to dodge this law and get their cases heard in state courts.

 

[Phoenix]

Do you actually think it's a prudent course of action to spend a billion plus on a system that will protect against a threat that most likely isn't going to occur? In all likelihood no nation is going to just launch 3 nukes at the US, with or without the shield.

That is the goal of the CURRENT system. Its scope is small while it is in development. Once it gets past its initial development its scope will expand.

If an attack by ICBM is going to come it will be with several missiles with MIRV warheads along with decoys and countermeasures.

False. The nations which the system was designed to defend against (China, North Korea, isolate launch from exploited Russian missile truck) do NOT have MIRV capability.

This is like me spending a million dollars on protecting my home against being hit by a meteor when there is a near infinite chance that a meteor will directly strike my house, and if one did by chance hit it, it would be so big that the million dollar failsafe I built wouldn't do a thing to stop it. Wouldn't it make more sense to focus on diplomatically making sure that another country would never want to nuke you?

Its called deterrent. If you develop a system which can protect your skies, the other person posessing nuclear weapons has much less weight for you. In todays battlefield environment unless the major nuclear nations decide to start throwing missiles at each other, the reality is that less than a handful of missiles are likely to not be destroyed before they can be launched.

 

[whytemyke]

While you guys are arguing the merits of the missile defense system, you might also want to take into account that Russia has already developed and tested a missile which will render the entire system useless.

 

[Phoenix]

While you guys are arguing the merits of the missile defense system, you might also want to take into account that Russia has already developed and tested a missile which will render the entire system useless.

Model and designation please.

 

[whytemyke]

Model and designation please.

Okily Dokily.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0104/p09s02-coop.html

However, the Bush administration's dream of a viable NMD has been rendered fantasy by the Russian test of the SS-27 Topol-M. According to the Russians, the Topol-M has high-speed solid-fuel boosters that rapidly lift the missile into the atmosphere, making boost-phase interception impossible unless one is located practically next door to the launcher. The SS-27 has been hardened against laser weapons and has a highly maneuverable post-boost vehicle that can defeat any intercept capability as it dispenses up to three warheads and four sophisticated decoys.

To counter the SS-27 threat, the US will need to start from scratch. And even if a viable defense could be mustered, by that time the Russians may have fielded an even more sophisticated missile, remaining one step ahead of any US countermeasures. The US cannot afford to spend billions of dollars on a missile-defense system that will never achieve the level of defense envisioned. The Bush administration's embrace of technology, and rejection of diplomacy, when it comes to arms control has failed.

 

[Phoenix]

Okily Dokily.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0104/p09s02-coop.html

Nope, sorry. The current system is actually designed for that sort of missile. The tracking system is designed to designed to descriminate against decoys and fakes (and that is actually a far easier problem than destroying . The key to solving all of these problems is to be able to put multiple warheads against an incoming target. The problem with all of these missile on missile solutions is the time to intercept problem. It takes a fair amount of time for an interceptor to reach ICBM such that which you can get the missile, its only being deflected and landing somewhere on your own soil.

This is a similar scenario to the Aegis/Sunburn problem. You have to be able to fire a large number of missiles in defense to improve your chances of success. Where the Aegis has nore more than 2 minutes to find and take down a Sunburn (very very tough), an ICBM has a relatively long flight path giving you a chance to catch it during boost, again during its orbit cucle and then one last time during its deorbit. The interceptors are only design for that last phase. There are other system for the other two phases of ICBM flight.

 

[ShadowRed]

Nope, sorry. The current system is actually designed for that sort of missile. The tracking system is designed to designed to descriminate against decoys and fakes (and that is actually a far easier problem than destroying . The key to solving all of these problems is to be able to put multiple warheads against an incoming target. The problem with all of these missile on missile solutions is the time to intercept problem. It takes a fair amount of time for an interceptor to reach ICBM such that which you can get the missile, its only being deflected and landing somewhere on your own soil.

This is a similar scenario to the Aegis/Sunburn problem. You have to be able to fire a large number of missiles in defense to improve your chances of success. Where the Aegis has nore more than 2 minutes to find and take down a Sunburn (very very tough), an ICBM has a relatively long flight path giving you a chance to catch it during boost, again during its orbit cucle and then one last time during its deorbit. The interceptors are only design for that last phase. There are other system for the other two phases of ICBM flight.

What about the sub orbital ICBMs that use air breathing motors to skirt the upper edges of the atmosphere, rather than go in a predictable orbit. They are able to make quick course corrections in the same way cruise missiles zig zag to their target and they carry multiple warheads/decoys. I'll have to search around for articles about this, but supposedly the Russians tested just such a missile that would render the US' missile shield useless.


Edit: Actually I think the system I'm thinking about is the same that whytemyke posted.

 

[Phoenix]

What about the sub orbital ICBMs that use air breathing motors to skirt the upper edges of the atmosphere, rather than go in a predictable orbit. They are able to make quick course corrections in the same way cruise missiles zig zag to their target and they carry multiple warheads/decoys. I'll have to search around for articles about this, but supposedly the Russians tested just such a missile that would render the US' missile shield useless.


Edit: Actually I think the system I'm thinking about is the same that whytemyke posted.

No, the SS-27 is a traditional 3 stage ICBM. What makes it harder for ABM is that it has a faster boost phase and that during its orbital descent can perform a variety of erratic maneuvers to attempt evading incoming missiles.

Not sure which sub orbital ICBMs you're referring to.

 

[ShadowRed]

No, the SS-27 is a traditional 3 stage ICBM. What makes it harder for ABM is that it has a faster boost phase and that during its orbital descent can perform a variety of erratic maneuvers to attempt evading incoming missiles.

Not sure which sub orbital ICBMs you're referring to.

I was mistaken about the sub orbital part but the rest of what iIwas saying fits the SS-27. It's ability to manuver so as to make it a more difficult target.

 

[whytemyke]

Yeah, the SS-27 is built so that it reaches outer atmosphere faster and then takes its time to re-enter and deploy. That's what is so deadly about the SS-27, because in order for the missile defense system to strike, it'd have to knock the missile out as it was over Russia, and because the missile would be out of range before our missiles could knock it down, it really is rendered useless.

The one that this defense system was designed to take out was the SS-25 which they worked on throughout the late 90's.

EDIT: although, all of this is completely moot to begin with, because our system can't even hit a rocket when it knows exactly where its coming from, and exactly where its going.

 

[Phoenix]

Actually no. The project has apparently been updated since the author got his/her information because the current system is based on the ability to hit ss-27 class targets - not that the ss-27 will be coming from either China or North Korea. Its so sad that people are so clueless about the history of the Cold War. The Soviet Union built an ABM system back in the 70s to protect Moscow and continue to update it today. The ABM-1 and ABM-3 are actually still active in Russian inventories and sitting in silos around Moscow. Russia posesses the ONLY ballistic missile defense in the world!

If there is anyone actually behind in ABM technology and or deployment its the United States. This is a system that should have been long ago to be honest as it is required to maintain an effective deterrent against China and North Korea. People keep talking about 'turning China into glass' and other such foolishness because they assume that nuclear warfare will involve hundreds of missiles leaving their subs and silos and ending civilization. That's actually the least likely scenario. The more likely scenario is one of a limited exchange. One such scenario is China deciding to roll into Taiwan and threatening a nuclear launch against Los Angeles or San Francisco if the US interferes. In 20 years or so, China will have gone well beyond depleting its natural resources at their current rate of consumption and they may decide they want to stretch out a little bit to get the resources they need - a very real scenario. These are instances of limited exchange - not volleys of hundreds of missiles. In order to ensure that you can't be blackmailed into sitting on the sidelines you MUST have a system that can keep the parties honest. When you lose that advantage in the nuclear age - all the military hardware in teh world become meaningless unless you're willing to sacrifice population centers to use it.

What will stop the US from being a super power? Complacency and stupidity of the general American populace.

 

[Phoenix]

Yeah, the SS-27 is built so that it reaches outer atmosphere faster and then takes its time to re-enter and deploy. That's what is so deadly about the SS-27, because in order for the missile defense system to strike, it'd have to knock the missile out as it was over Russia, and because the missile would be out of range before our missiles could knock it down, it really is rendered useless.

False. ABMs do NOT hit their targets in the boost phase! They hit their targets in the orbital phase and the deorbit phase! It would be impossible for any ABM system to reach an ICBM during its boost phase. The SS-27 is faster and 'laser hardened' (according to Russia) to defeat airborne laser platforms that CAN target missiles in their boost phase and to defeat SM-3s from Aegis missile cruisers who can hit missiles as they are first entering orbit.

What makes the SS-27 deadly is the same thing that makes the Sunburn deadly - you just have a lot less time to react to it and get missiles up against it and it reduces the time that you have to launch a second volley should you be unsuccessful.

The one that this defense system was designed to take out was the SS-25 which they worked on throughout the late 90's.

False. The SS-27 went into development in the 80s not the 90s. BTW, SS-27s are just going into deployment so that's roughly a 20 year window for the development of a new system. How long have the US ABMs been in development?

EDIT: although, all of this is completely moot to begin with, because our system can't even hit a rocket when it knows exactly where its coming from, and exactly where its going.

Yeah - you'd think that a system that is in deevelopment wouldn't be perfect 'eh? You have any idea how long it took for them to build ICBMs in the first place? They didn't just put a warhead on a rocket and expect it to hit a city with 150m CEP ya know. The first ICBMs generally exploded before even reaching orbit, and others later couldn't deliver their payload to anything other than "within the country" (which is one of the reasons why both superpwoers have so many - they couldn't guarantee with any success where they would land so you had to launch a large number of them). Todays missiles are accurate enough that you can target them at military facilities specifically.

Success takes time - but that's lost on today's microwave, attention deficit disorder, broadband porn world.

 

[Pudding Tame]

Sorry it took me so long to reply Pheonix, I've been sick and had work.

For ever several million dollar tank, jet, etc. a missile that costs 20k can down it. Nothing new there.

But in this case, it's the missle that costs more than the tank.

Need a source on that one. Hadn't seen anything along those lines.

My memory was a little fuzzy when I made the oversight claim but the overall concerns are still there, no objective oversight on a defense system that this administration says is ready to protect us, when it clearly isn't.

Interceptor System Set, But Doubts Remain

Secrecy on Missile Defense Grows

The real question is do you wait for the threat to become large before you start trying to defend yourself? Logic dictates that if you have time to develop a system when you know a threat is small yet growing, that you should build that system so that it can be available when the threat is real and looming.

Yes, but right now we are in a war against terrorists, and despite our extensive resources, they are finite.

A lot of people think is problem number one and the most likely terrorist nuclear attack scenario is by a nuke smuggled into the country. Finding ways to better secure our borders, including finding ways to inspect more than 5% of the shipments sent into the U.S. everyday should be a greater priority than it is.

This administration seems more focused on a problem that while horrific if it ever came to pass, is a long shot compared to what was posted above. The concept of MAD is still a deterrent to Russia, China and all their nukes. If N. Korea or Iran ever launched a nuke it would simply be AD for them.

Would I like a viable working missle defense system protecting my country, yes of course. (Ignoring the eventual anti-missle and anti-missle-missle arms race) But right now that money could be used for more important needs.