Are times tough in the USA?

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.

NAMO

Sicc OG
Apr 11, 2009
10,840
3,257
0
45
#1
not tough enough it seems!



http://www.news.com.au/technology/w...t-well-obviously/story-e6frfro0-1226029203062

At $10,000 to shoot down a $400 rocket, Iron Storm's a bargain, says Israel

Shoots down short-range rockets
Extra $250m investment from US
Works with Arrow, David's Sling

ISRAEL has deployed Iron Dome - a cutting-edge rocket defence system designed to protect its citizens from bombardment.

After four years in development, Israel hopes the homegrown system will is a solution to the years of rocket fire from Gaza.

The primitive rockets have evaded Israel's high-tech weaponry, in part because their short flight path, just a few seconds, makes them hard to track.

The government approved Iron Dome in 2007. Each battery comprises detection and tracking radar, state-of-the-art fire control software and three launchers, each with 20 interceptor missiles.

In May, US President Barack Obama asked Congress to give Israel $205 million to develop the system, on top of the annual three billion dollars Israel receives from Washington.

Iron Dome will join the Arrow long-range ballistic missile defense system in an ambitious multi-layered program to protect Israeli cities from rockets and missiles fired from Lebanon, the Gaza Strip, Syria and Iran.

A third system, known as David's Sling, is currently being developed with the aim of countering medium-range missiles.

Iron Dome uses sophisticated cameras and radar to track incoming rockets, determine where they will land, and intercept and destroy them far from their targets.

If the system determines the rocket is headed to an open area where casualties are unlikely, it can allow the weapon to explode on the ground.

Brigadier General Doron Gavish, commander of Israel's air defence corps, said Iron Dome has passed a series of tests and has now reached its "evaluation phase" in the field.

It is expected to be fully operational in a matter of months.

He added that it was only supposed to be deployed later in the year, but it was put into operation earlier because of the recent rocket attacks from Gaza.

"Obviously, after what we saw in the last few weeks, we accelerated the phases," he said, standing before the brown, box-like battery on the outskirts of Beersheba, southern Israel's largest city with a population of nearly 200,000.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gave a sober assessment of Iron Dome, saying he "didn't want to create the illusion" that the system would offer Israel 100 per cent protection from rocket attacks.

"The Iron Dome system is still in an experimental stage, and at any rate, we cannot deploy batteries that can protect every house, every school, every (military) base and every facility," he said.

A second anti-missile battery will be deployed in another large southern city, Ashdod, the military said, without specifying a date.

Officials refused to say how many batteries would be deployed altogether, what their range was, or how much the system would cost.

Analysts have estimated the cost of shooting down a rocket could be tens of thousands of dollars, compared to just a few hundred dollars to produce the rocket.

"The real test is not the price of knocking down the rocket, but how much damage the rocket would cause, and the price in human life, if it hits," Brig Gen Gavish said.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Boggles the mind..
 
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
45
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#3
oh yeah let's give Israel more money, another $250 million is no problem on top of the billions they get each year. But STOP PLANNED PARENTHOOD! They are the devil! They provide cancer screenings, STD testing, pap smears, etc. STOP THE FUNDING NOW! They are the reason we are in dept! And public Radio! stop the funding of the voice of the communities!

But lets give israel another quarter billion on top of the several billion they already get. Logical!

I love how the dems/republicans all they talk about is how to cut spending. But not a single one of those fucks will mention to cut funding from the military. Nope it's lets cut medicare/medicade, welfare, food stamps, public libraries, education, etc. etc. etc.
 

Mac Jesus

Girls send me your nudes
May 31, 2003
10,771
54,050
113
41
#4
oh yeah let's give Israel more money, another $250 million is no problem on top of the billions they get each year. But STOP PLANNED PARENTHOOD! They are the devil! They provide cancer screenings, STD testing, pap smears, etc. STOP THE FUNDING NOW! They are the reason we are in dept! And public Radio! stop the funding of the voice of the communities!

But lets give israel another quarter billion on top of the several billion they already get. Logical!
This is fucking genius! I always thought you were a god-hating-arab-loving-communist. I say we continue to fund Israeli so the Jewish people can take back the land that rightfully belongs to them according to the bible. That way we'll see the second coming of Jesus. Fucking genius.
 

Gas One

Moderator
May 24, 2006
39,741
12,147
113
46
Downtown, Pittsburg. Southeast Dago.
#8
times are hard for people in america whom are lazy

but that in no way means money does not circulate, theres homeless people in san francisco who get 1600 monthly checks on top of two other checks

you can own one of the illest homes and be a few steps away from bieng broke

the real issue is americans spending habits to sustain survival/life, we overconsume, in all cases

what i eat dosent make you shit, as jayz would say
i ususally wouldnt quote camel but we must remember
camels have mastered the drought

thats all that should matter as an individual, be you and dont worry about what the fuck the govt spends
 
Sep 16, 2008
5,632
7
0
105
#12
I see what you're saying 2-0 about cutting spending, but cutting military spending is not a good idea when oher countries military's are beginning to accelerate at a rapid rate. We do need to defend ourselves in case something were to go down, and military technology employs more than a million Americans, so the more expansion the better in my view
 
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
45
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#13
I see what you're saying 2-0 about cutting spending, but cutting military spending is not a good idea when oher countries military's are beginning to accelerate at a rapid rate. We do need to defend ourselves in case something were to go down, and military technology employs more than a million Americans, so the more expansion the better in my view
name one country that spends close to what the US spends. Can't. Name one country that spends HALF of what the US spends. Can't do it. Name one country that spends a quarter of what the US spends. Still can't do it.

This was in 2008:



And that figure isn't even accurate as there are other areas in which the US spends on the military that wasn't included.
 
Nov 24, 2003
6,307
3,639
113
#15
I see what you're saying 2-0 about cutting spending, but cutting military spending is not a good idea when oher countries military's are beginning to accelerate at a rapid rate.
Based on what is it not a good idea?

You also need to think about causation here. In other words, are the other countries accelerating their military spending just to keep up with us?

All of that is not even considering the more important question - Why do we need to spend so much on military in the first place?

We do need to defend ourselves in case something were to go down
Why don't other countries need to spend anywhere near what we spend "to defend themselves in case something goes wrong"?

Did you ever think the need to "defend ourselves" is directly proportional to the size and intrusiveness of our military?

and military technology employs more than a million Americans, so the more expansion the better in my view
What is the purpose of the military - to defend this country or to employ people?

PS - Am I reading your last comment correctly? Timm is suggesting the US should increase the size of its government in an effort to employ more people?? hmmmmm that is a very anti-typicalTimm pov. Or because it's related to the military you flip flop on your political standpoint on the roll of government in our society?
 
Sep 16, 2008
5,632
7
0
105
#17
name one country that spends close to what the US spends. Can't. Name one country that spends HALF of what the US spends. Can't do it. Name one country that spends a quarter of what the US spends. Still can't do it.

This was in 2008:



And that figure isn't even accurate as there are other areas in which the US spends on the military that wasn't included.
what year is it? is it 2008? come with some facts that aren't 3 years old. China and Russia are developing gen 5 fighter jets and shit
 
Sep 16, 2008
5,632
7
0
105
#18
Based on what is it not a good idea?

You also need to think about causation here. In other words, are the other countries accelerating their military spending just to keep up with us?

All of that is not even considering the more important question - Why do we need to spend so much on military in the first place?



Why don't other countries need to spend anywhere near what we spend "to defend themselves in case something goes wrong"?

Did you ever think the need to "defend ourselves" is directly proportional to the size and intrusiveness of our military?



What is the purpose of the military - to defend this country or to employ people?

PS - Am I reading your last comment correctly? Timm is suggesting the US should increase the size of its government in an effort to employ more people?? hmmmmm that is a very anti-typicalTimm pov. Or because it's related to the military you flip flop on your political standpoint on the roll of government in our society?
We spend a lot on our military to defend our nation. Other nations excelerate their military to defend their nation. Stop taking shit I say and making it more extreme. I pointed out that the military employs more than 1 million Americans. Don't fucking get the idea that I said the purpose of the military is to employ people. You are reading my last comment correctly. The last time I checked America wasn't run by the military, so increasing the size of the military has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with increasing the size of government.
 
Jan 9, 2009
5,320
120
0
54
#20
what year is it? is it 2008? come with some facts that aren't 3 years old. China and Russia are developing gen 5 fighter jets and shit
In 2008, the most recent year for which complete global data is available, the U.S. approved $696.3 billion in defense budget authority (fiscal 2010 dollars). This figure includes funding for the Pentagon base budget, Department of Energy-administered nuclear weapons activities, and supplemental appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan.

This number is eight times more than Russia, 15 times more than Japan, 47 times more than Israel, and nearly 73 times more than Iran.

In inflation-adjusted dollars, the total U.S. defense budget has grown from $432 billion in fiscal 2001 to $720 billion in fiscal 2011, a real increase of approximately 67 percent.

http://armscontrolcenter.org/policy/securityspending/articles/US_vs_Global/