Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!military
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: US intercepting an ICBM
Message-ID: <1990Oct4.012253.11279@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 4 Oct 90 01:22:53 GMT
References: <1990Oct2.235242.23678@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military-request@att.att.com
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
Lines: 25
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
>From: kaminsky-david@CS.YALE.EDU (David Kaminsky)
>	With the news reporting Saddam Hussein 5 years away from
>both an ICBM and an atomic weapon, I was wondering what capabilities
>the US had to stop 1 (or 2)  incoming ICBM.

None whatsoever.

The Soviets would have some chance of intercepting one headed for Moscow,
but elsewhere the story is the same for them.

You might be able to stop one with a Patriot battery if you could figure
out exactly where it was headed and have the Patriots there waiting for it.
This isn't going to work for area defence.

SDIO isn't sure whether to be happy about the Gulf crisis or not, according
to AvLeak.  On the one hand, it considerably strengthens the case for a
limited missile-defence system that can cope with a Third-World attack.
On the other hand, Desert Shield is eating money by the carload, and the
military budget situation is going to be a wee bit tight this fall.
-- 
Imagine life with OS/360 the standard  | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
operating system.  Now think about X.  |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu   utzoo!henry