From: Robert Comer 

>Impressive missiles in that case. Can catch a ICBM going somewhere else
>or a short range high speed asm/ssm/cruise coming straight at you.

One type can't do that, but two types can -- we are developing more than 2
types.  Heck, plain old vulcan guns stationed outside the perimeter can
protect from a lot of low level incoming.

>There was a reason why Russia threatened the European sites with cruise
>missiles.

Yeah, they didn't want the missile bases there.

>Also consider the geography of Azerbaijan. One could get very close w/o
>breaking the radar horizon.

Yep, but it depends on just where you put it and if there is any overlooking peaks...

>But hey......if you were to adopt a layered defence you'd have to just
>about have to turn all of azerbaijan into a US base.

I don't think that would be necessary, but don't we already have a base
around there somewhere?

Besides, I don't really think it's necessary to have a fully wartime ready
installation, it's mere presence puts a kink in a few plans some might
have. (Not just Iran, but Pakistan, Syria, Israel, terrorist groups.)

--
Bob Comer


On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 19:54:09 +0100, Adam
<""4thwormcastfromthemolehill\"{at}the field.near the
bridge"> wrote:

>Robert Comer wrote:
>> True, but that's part of the interceptors job too -- shorter range
>> missiles/cruise missiles.
>>
>
>Really.
>
>Impressive missiles in that case. Can catch a ICBM going somewhere else
>or a short range high speed asm/ssm/cruise coming straight at you.
>
>There was a reason why Russia threatened the European sites with cruise
>missiles.
>
>Also consider the geography of Azerbaijan. One could get very close w/o
>breaking the radar horizon.
>
>But hey......if you were to adopt a layered defence you'd have to just
>about have to turn all of azerbaijan into a US base.
>
>Adam

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5