Military Review

U.S. GMD missile defense system: naked king dress on a protracted sale


Sometimes it’s useful to look into the past. In particular, it is useful to read the statements of the American military and politicians about the very system of the US national missile defense that they were building, they were building ... and, in general, they did not build anything functional, unlike Cheburashka, Crocodile Genes and their friends. For the statements collected in one place, I would like to thank the authors of the blog Mostlymissiledefence (these are employees of two American universities - from Ithaca, New York, and College Park in Maryland) for their efforts to collect all the verbal nonsense that American politicians and generals broadcast this problem.

Let's start with Bill Clinton. On September 1, 2000, speaking at Georgetowns University, he specifically said:

"I just can’t draw a conclusion, based on the information I have today, that we are confident enough in the technology and operational effectiveness of the entire missile defense system to move forward towards deployment. Therefore, I decided not to authorize the deployment of a national missile defense system yet."

The first preachers of the "Witness Sect PRO"

Less than three years have passed, and "confidence" in the effectiveness of a non-existent missile defense system has already appeared, and what! Edward Aldridge, Under Secretary of Defense for Procurement, Technology and Supply, said March 18, 2003 (aggression against Iraq was on the agenda, from which the United States has not yet gotten out of it) that "efficiency is in the 90% range." There is nothing yet, but what effectiveness is already - miracles, and nothing more. At that time, 8 tests were carried out, half ended in failure, and the goals, to put it mildly, were extremely far from the level of decent SLBMs and ICBMs, and even SLBMs.

The then director of MDA (the ABM Agency, now led by Michael Griffin, a true guru of cutting the budget for high-tech myths), however, was somewhat more cautious, saying that "there are many things that go into the concept of efficiency and therefore everyone can be right" . In 2005, the new MDA Director, Lieutenant General G. Obering, was also very cautious: "We have more than zero chance to intercept, I believe, an incoming warhead, and this confidence will improve over time." Although, if you recall that these people talked about intercepting the BMD ICBMs, although such missile defense systems of the system are still unable to hit even in ideal polygon conditions, even these cautious statements can be counted as unfounded praise. The same Obering a little later, a year later, declared, "from what I saw and what I know about the system and its capabilities, I am very sure (of its capabilities)." Living and believing, as they say, is wonderful. It would be what. The missile defense system is still not a god, and here I would like real evidence that there is, what to believe. But they were not then, and no, and now practically - but faith was and is.

Admiral Keating, then head of the Northern Command of the Armed Forces of the country, joined the ranks of adherents of the "true faith" in the same 2006.

"When the president announces the limited readiness of the missile defense system, we will be ready as a shooter, if you want, to fulfill the mission to protect our country. And I am very confident in the effectiveness of this system."

The then President of the United States, Bush Jr., joined the ranks of members of a sect that preaches faith in a holy missile defense, on July 6, 2006, in response to a question by Larry King about the unsuccessful test of the DPRK by medium-range BR on the eve of (ICBM, as we recall, appeared in a first approximation among North Koreans in 2017) who declared: “If the missile goes to the United States, we have a missile defense system that will protect our country.” Well, if the then most long-range BR Korea’s BR was heading towards the United States, it would not have reached Guam, the range of North Korean combat missiles then really did not exceed 3,5 km, so Mr. Bush could lie even to the point of turning blue. A little later, in 2007, General Obering states:

"Does the system work? The answer is yes. Will it work against more complex threats in the future? We believe that it will."

In general, faith again. He later specified that faith applies to "about 1 or 2 missiles aimed at the United States."

Korean-Iranian threat, which was not

Later, statements were added to the creed of the sect of "witnesses of the US missile defense" that, together with the DPRK’s ICBM (then nonexistent), the system is capable of intercepting the nonexistent Iran ICBM.

"The likelihood that the GMD system will be able to intercept this today will be high for 90%."

- said MDA Director Patrick O'Reilly in response to a question from Trent Franks about countering "one ICBM going from Tehran to New York," December 1, 2010.

Well, yes, to protect yourself from something that does not exist in principle (the range of the Iranian infantry regiment is officially limited at all to 2000 km, although the energy sector really allows them long ranges, but there were no tests, and there is no question of ICBMs) that still can’t protect against such (ICBM) threats. In 2011, Bradley Roberts, U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear and Anti-Ballistic Missile Policies, states that "today's position is that we are well protected from entry-level ICBMs that could be deployed by states like North Korea and Iran , and which are small, relatively slow and lack sophisticated anti-missile defense capabilities. " What was meant by “slow” ICBMs should be asked Mr. Roberts, because any ICBMs launched at the same range along a standard path will have approximately the same speed at the same time. Another issue is the time it takes to set this speed, that is, the duration of the ATU (active portion of the trajectory), in terms of counteracting the missile defense with the initial portion of the flight, this is a very important thing - to reduce the ATE to a minimum, like our ICBMs of the 5th generation of combat missile systems (" Topol-M "," Yars "," Yars-S "," Yars-M "," Sarmat "and others). Did Mr. Roberts mean this? But the United States simply did not have the means to intercept in the initial section of the hypothetical Iranian ICBMs at that time, and even now, if they did not deploy them practically on the Persian Gulf coast. But this is not the main thing, the main thing is faith, it must be supported in the flock.

On May 9, 2013, Lieutenant General R. Formica, commanding the US Air Defense and Missile Defense, in response to a question from Senator Mark Udell about the ability of the GMD missile defense system to protect all of the United States, including the East Coast, from current missile threats and threats from the DPRK in the near future and Iran stated:

"We are truly confident in the ABM system's ability to protect the United States from a limited attack by North Korea and Iran today and in the near future."

In July of the same year, after an unsuccessful test of the FTG-07 system (the interceptor did not even separate from the carrier), he stated that he "remained true to his answer in the testimony he gave on May 9th."

Approximately in the same spirit, other Pentagon officials declared. In August of that year, the then Director of the MDA, Vice Admiral Syring, a man who was flying with him in the next seats on the plane asked (finding out who he was dealing with), saying, "Am I protected where I live?" The brave admiral immediately replied: "Of course, you are protected. Yes, you are protected. We are proud to protect you." Although here, probably, any military man in any country would have said something similar. Well, professionals do not spread about the existing problems by some first-comer in a taxi or buses or planes. More precisely, this happens only in liberal tweets in Russia - only there are all secret news taxi drivers tell the authors in secret that someone there secretly told.

The threat appeared on the horizon

In 2017, the U.S. missile threat from the DPRK finally became a reality (although not quite, because several times tested ICBMs are not yet combat ready and deployed) and lying about security from Korean missiles has become much less secure. By the way, the Americans are stubbornly continuing to bypass the question: why, if they fear only Iran and the DPRK, will they stir up the elements of the system primarily in our direction? Like the European segment, for example. Another question is that all these systems have no real effectiveness against the strategic nuclear forces of the Russian Federation, and the forces and means are such that even in the long term they are unable to help here, even if they could intercept our SLBMs and ICBMs, say, in the initial sections trajectories. It seems that these plans were generally imposed for some other reality. Like “Russia without Putin” and any analogue of it, where the liberal bacchanalia of the 90s continues, the outskirts are gradually falling, and the nuclear potential is being squeezed to the very 150 charges in 2015, as predicted by American analysts at the end of 90 -kh (often then this domestic rubbish was repeated by various domestic political boobies in the early 2000s, but then such speeches disappeared somewhere, boobies themselves and now smoke the broadcast.)

Nevertheless, in 2017, both General Joe Dunford (chairman of the U.S. Armed Forces School at that time and until recently), and General John Heiten (then commander of the STRATCOM of the U.S. Armed Forces), and General Greaves (MDA Director) amicably announced their confidence in protecting "all 50 states" from North Korean missiles. And Colonel Kik, who commanded the 100th National Missile Defense ABM brigade (the very same GMD missiles in Alaska and Vandenberg are subordinate to it), so declared "100% system efficiency"! Apparently, he really wanted to become a general. But he didn’t. General Greaves said at all that the country's defense against ICBMs was "proven through testing." Excuse me, general, what tests? Of all 20 tests of the system (50% of them were declared successful or partially successful, which is clearly not enough), none of them fired at an ICBM simulator target!

We will not talk about how the Americans provided all these tests and how close they are to reality, and how close to the Potemkin village. But even in the last test on March 25, 2019, by launching 2 anti-missiles, a target was declared to be hit, simulating a missile that only formally entered the class higher than medium-range missiles. Its range was about 6000 km (and the limit for the ballistic missile defense is 5500). At the same time, the tests turned out to be so “successful” that they instantly covered up the program for creating an advanced interceptor, its deployment, and the deployment of additional anti-missile systems with it, and the question was raised about a new program for creating an interceptor, and even a new anti-missile. If everything was so good, why all this?

But in 2017, there was no talk of such tests, but the generals hung noodles on the ears of the White House, Congress, and the people of the United States. Of all the active speakers, perhaps Admiral Hill, deputy director of MDA, can put a plus sign for quick wit - he said that “if your children today ask if we are protected from the DPRK, I’ll tell you that they need to answer what we have the strongest defense against such a threat. " Indeed, children do not need to be scared ahead of time, and the admiral didn’t seem to tell the truth, and there seems to be nothing to show him: “I took care of the children, and this is the end,” as one of the heroes of “12 chairs” said.

But, the question is, if you guys from Washington are so good at protecting against the threat of North Korean ICBMs, then why did you sharply exclude Kim Jong-un from the rogue and non-shaking leaders, and did Trump even call him a friend and a wonderful guy? Are Americans inflamed with love for Juche ideas? Is Donald Trump really cute young Kim? It may be attractive, but politicians do not put personal sympathies and relations above the interests of countries, otherwise they are not politicians. Everything is simpler: the threat has become real, and since it cannot be somehow leveled by military means, diplomacy must be activated. Americans talk only with the strong, and with those who are really capable of threatening them. Remember how Donald Trump dismissed his assistants (which later became known) for not daring not to call him when VV called. Putin, telling them that they didn’t call me when the guy called, the only one who could completely destroy the United States in a matter of hours ... Iran would have nuclear weapon and delivery vehicles of at least a conditionally intercontinental range like the Chinese, with which everything is foggy with the real range, or the North Korean, which are not deployed at all, would be the Iranian president as "a cool guy" as Kim, and Iran’s rakhbar would even become a source wisdom, which is not shameful to listen to the US president.

20 years have passed. Nothing changes

Several years have passed. Do you think something has changed in the missile defense sect? There is nothing. The brave military bravo report something like: "Everything is very simple for me. If a rogue country or other entity shoots ICBMs at us, we intercept it." This was expressed by Major Brewer from the 100th anti-missile defense brigade of the National Guard of Colorado, which was already mentioned above. Of course, it is clear that in any army oaks are needed in order to strengthen the defense, but not to the same extent!

All the same unforgettable Mike Griffin, now deputy defense minister for research and development, confidently declares the ABM system's ability to "solve any problems", and he "trusts its technical capabilities." He would have said something else! After all, he was at the forefront of the system, and the scheme by which all interested persons and structures profit from selling this "dress of the naked king" to America is directly related to it. But he immediately recovered, they say, any tasks, but they are not designed against Russia and even China. We, Griffin said, know how to do this with the help of current technologies, but this, they say, will require enormous resources, "and this is a budget discussion and not my competence." Well done! You can feel the experience of slipping between any raindrops, a large hardware school of maneuvering!

They keep the brand and General Hayten, who has now become deputy chairman of the OKNS. Now (in January of this year) he is 100% sure of the XNUMX% protection of the United States from North Korean missiles. Previously, when he was in lower positions, he was much less sure, it seems that the position allowed him to lie less, but now it is impossible. Although, on the other hand, he was referring to the current threat, and the DPRK does not have any missiles of intercontinental radius that are actually deployed and are on combat duty at the moment. And other "anti-missile" figures became somewhat more cautious in their assessments. So, Admiral Hill, director of MDA, said a couple of weeks ago that "he is confident in the current capabilities to defend against DPRK missiles, but in the next five years he’s not at all," so you need to give even more money to the GMD missile defense program. But you only recently stated that you are confident in the system now and in the future? Or did the memory wander off? No, corporations just need the money again, and businessmen will find generals and politicians how to thank them later.

Hmm, the tailor rogues from Andersen's fairy tale were able to sell the invisible dress to the king only once, and then - some child ruined the entire media effect. And American dodger tailors have been selling the same dress to all of America for more than twenty years on an ongoing basis - and everyone seems to like it. Talent, what can I say! Or just really want to cheat?
Photos used:
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Sonmaster
    Sonmaster 26 February 2020 05: 46 New
    I am certainly not an expert, but in my narrow-minded understanding, no missile defense system will ever provide "100% XNUMX% protection of the US territory", neither now nor in the future.
    1. Amateur
      Amateur 26 February 2020 05: 55 New
      "Only an insurance policy gives a XNUMX% guarantee." Attributed to Ostap Bender.
    2. Fedor egoist
      Fedor egoist 26 February 2020 12: 50 New
      Quote: Sonmaster
      I am certainly not an expert, but in my narrow-minded understanding, no missile defense system will ever provide "100% XNUMX% protection of the US territory"

      At the moment, no missile defense system can provide 100% protection even to a single city, not to mention the millions of square kilometers of prairies / deserts / forests in the United States and in the Russian Federation. They, in principle, do not need to be protected, nobody will beat there.
      Now the main task of our missile defense is to intercept the majority of the first wave of nuclear warheads with the aim of giving an additional 20-30 minutes of DM (anti-missile defense) - for retaliatory strike, to the military - to disperse / ditch and to the civilian population - to shelter in shelters / metro / etc. All of the above applies to MSCs and the Moscow Region. In other territories, we do not have a missile defense system.
      Quote: Sonmaster
      neither now nor in the future

      Now yes. But about the future, I would not be so categorical. Someday it will probably be possible to install a kind of power / plasma / energy domes over individual objects. Again, laser weapons are actively developing, in this direction we can expect serious development in the next decade. Although, of course, attack technology will also not stand still))
      1. ABM
        ABM 26 February 2020 14: 35 New
        our missile defense system is fully operational and able to fulfill its tasks. This is achieved by the use of special warheads - thermonuclear warheads of all missile defense systems available in Russia.
  2. Vasily Ponomarev
    Vasily Ponomarev 26 February 2020 06: 08 New
    short article
  3. Slavutich
    Slavutich 26 February 2020 06: 17 New
    And American dodger tailors have been selling the same dress throughout America for more than twenty years on an ongoing basis.

    It seems that America is not soaring on this issue, they have not had a war on their territory for 150 years.
    Unlike us.
    1. mark2
      mark2 26 February 2020 06: 50 New
      They do not steam and you do not steam.
      1. Snail N9
        Snail N9 26 February 2020 07: 01 New
        "The US does not have a missile defense" .... maybe not .... just what is it, so many cries of the Russian Foreign Ministry about American "interceptors" near the borders of Russia? Something tells me that the United States has this very missile defense system and is being built gradually and inevitably, it is building up in different directions and a lot in echelon ... But Russia ... like, we will beat everything with "hypersound" and throw hats, ... we also have ... like "Poseidon" and "Petrel" ..... "Petrel" .... which, like, was all in Nyonoksa and ended ... But there are a lot of hats, this is- Yes.....
        1. maxxavto
          maxxavto 26 February 2020 08: 51 New
          because there are universal launchers where you can charge not only anti-aircraft missiles but also attacking
        2. vvvjak
          vvvjak 26 February 2020 08: 58 New
          Quote: Snail N9
          so many cries of the Russian Foreign Ministry about American "interceptors" near the borders of Russia

          The Russian Foreign Ministry is crying (as you put it) not about missile defense, but about the fact that missile defense installations "with a slight movement of the hand" are turning into means of attack.
          Quote: Snail N9
          Something tells me

          The argument is interesting. GMD, SM-3 with AGIS and THADD (very conditionally) - all of these missile defense systems have been repeatedly analyzed for HE.
          Quote: Snail N9
          But there are a lot of caps, yes .....

          Yes, and even more and more to become "useprapalo".
          If you try to look more or less objectively on missile defense issues, the sword is still very far ahead of the shield in the USA and in the Russian Federation.
        3. Berber
          Berber 26 February 2020 10: 16 New
          The fact is that the war has moved into the information and economic field. The armed forces are very important, but they are in the background. Therefore, the author can be completely trusted.
          The Pentagon has become where the top US "makes money." And the quality of weapons does not play a big role here, the main thing is marketing, and a multilevel one. On all projects "grandmas are sawing".
        4. ZAV69
          ZAV69 26 February 2020 13: 00 New
          Quote: Snail N9
          maybe not .... just what is it, so many all sorts of laments of the Russian Foreign Ministry about American "interceptors" near the borders of Russia?

          In the launchers of these interceptors, a tomahawk stands up like a native.
          Quote: Snail N9
          the United States has this very missile defense system and is being built gradually and is inevitably being built up in different directions and much echelons

          Maybe she is. Only no one will write or talk about it, and the one who accidentally sees a truck hits.
      2. Slavutich
        Slavutich 26 February 2020 10: 59 New
        We are taking a steam bath: tradition! laughing
  4. rocket757
    rocket757 26 February 2020 07: 19 New
    No one hopes to live forever ... just many, it is not forever, they want to live .... in abundance, for example.
    Nothing new, basically.
  5. Alexander Dubinin
    Alexander Dubinin 26 February 2020 07: 50 New
    "There is no need to deceive me, I myself am glad to be deceived ..."
  6. maxxavto
    maxxavto 26 February 2020 08: 55 New
    about military air defense of near and medium range is also interesting
  7. ABM
    ABM 26 February 2020 10: 51 New
    replacing a nuclear missile defense warhead solves all problems! perhaps it is planned to do so. Then the myth of the inaccuracy of the missile defense system will crumble and there will be nothing to cover - one close gap and all warheads, false targets, etc. will be swept from orbit
    1. ZAV69
      ZAV69 26 February 2020 13: 04 New
      Quote: ABM
      one close gap and all warheads, false targets, etc. will sweep from orbit

      There is no atmosphere in orbit, so there is no shock wave, there is nothing to sweep. In order to guarantee the killing of a warhead, it is necessary to undermine the anti-warhead almost within a radius of 100 meters. Something like that....
      1. ABM
        ABM 26 February 2020 14: 29 New
        Americans tested nuclear weapons three times in space, ours (as part of the creation of missile defense) - five times. We have adopted it, they don’t have it (a side factor is the strongest EMP, which destroys electronics). Test data is classified. I think you also don’t know the real data on the radius of the warhead’s destruction, besides, the TNT equivalent is unknown - and it can be any.
        1. ZAV69
          ZAV69 26 February 2020 18: 19 New
          Well, they definitely won’t drag a megaton fool, it’s painfully heavy. Kiloton by 20, will not fit into the missile defense anymore, yet it should be maneuverable.
          1. ABM
            ABM 26 February 2020 23: 08 New
            Americans 1.4 Megatons rushed in space - then there were few satellites, but the Amy burned the connection on earth. 20 Kt is nonsense, there are really a hundred meters. But here our general is sure
            1. ZAV69
              ZAV69 26 February 2020 23: 14 New
              They tore off. And threw what? A conventional launcher that is designed to display a communications satellite. In this case, there should be a small anti-ballast capable of active maneuvering, otherwise it will only intercept the exhaust.
              1. ABM
                ABM 26 February 2020 23: 20 New
                this is on the American principle of defeat! our principle does not provide for this - everything will be thrown from orbit: satellites, warheads, false targets ... so there is no need to aim. And our Sergei Grabchuk said: "Moscow is reliably defended in anti-missile terms: the system allows intercepting missiles attacking the capital" with almost 100 percent probability "
  8. Protos
    Protos 26 February 2020 12: 19 New
    The missile defense system is the most fierce cut of the century yes
    Fee for the military-industrial complex of NATO for decades !!!
  9. Imperial Technocrat
    Imperial Technocrat 26 February 2020 14: 38 New
    Some people still believe in fairy tales of scandals, but less and less
  10. nickname7
    nickname7 26 February 2020 20: 01 New
    They keep the brand and General Hayten, he is 100% confident in the absolute protection of the United States

    The position of the general is to demonstrate confidence and instill peace in the population.
    But their most powerful weapon is the dollar, through which they control the native nouveau riche and bureaucrats.
  11. Antokha
    Antokha 27 February 2020 13: 01 New
    Great article with a lot of humor. Sadly, I can add, from personal experience, that the developer of the lowest level of the hierarchy (that is, the one who actually creates the product) realizes that his immediate boss already very poorly understands what he (the employee) is doing and what difficulties there are and ways of overcoming them, he often does not want to listen or he has no time. And already the boss at a higher level does not understand almost anything, but only demands from subordinates to say "Yes" or "No" to the question of whether it works. And it is clear what kind of answer he is waiting for. So it is with these Americans.