Joint Area Missile Shield Network

Rotaretilbo wrote:That would be the point of having WMDs ourselves.

In a perfect game that would be enough but, in this MAD won't work, they may have no other objective then screwing everyone else over but i digress.

This is true in the real world too. Thus, as in the real world, we must prevent those people from getting WMDs.

(Except for the fact that anyone can obtain them in this game, and in relatively short time, To protect the nations that actually dont want the game to end in nuclear winter a missle defense system needs to be in place.

If someone not in the WU gets nuclear capability right after we clear them of not having it and decides to blow up half a continent then theres nothing we can do without a defense system. Nuking them back wont matter becuase thats what they want, now the world is uninhabitable, everyone not along the equator or on the moon is dead and thus they have won)

"I'm not saying we don't need a missile defence system period, just that one which shoots down any missile is not the correct solution."

Rotaretilbo wrote:Simply put, the technology that would allow to scan the contents of a warhead from space is extreme, and we would imagine extremely expensive. While nuclear warheads may be more easily detected, chemical and biological warheads are for all intents and purposes identical to a conventional warhead, with the exception of a sealed section containing the chemical or biological agent. Furthermore, judging the payload of a warhead to determine whether or not it exceeds the half kiloton of TNT yield limit is difficult.

With a group effort, the costs can be easily overcome. This will not be a problem.

Rotaretilbo wrote:I understand that it has been suggested that this system shoot down any and all intercontinental ballistic missiles, but that is not entirely feasible. Simply put, we cannot demand that any nation which intends to launch a legal, conventional warhead in the form of an ICBM must first ask us permission.

I fail to see why this cannot be. If a nation launches an ICBM for a reason that the World Union would not support, it is pretty much guaranteed that the missile violates international law and would evoke World Union intervention anyway. Please offer an example situation where an ICBM could be ethically used in which the World Union would deny clearance.

Rotaretilbo wrote:However, even if a method to determine whether or not a missile is a weapon of mass destruction or not from space that is not excessively expensive is discovered, there is another important issue that must be considered. While this system does indeed severely limit the use of intercontinental ballistic missiles, it does not at all affect cruise missiles, conventional bombers loaded with weapons of mass destruction, and any other delivery system for a weapon of mass destruction. The intercontinental may be the most prolific means by which to deliver a nuclear payload, but it is certainly not the only way, especially as a first strike, the kind we would seek to prevent, as responding in kind does not breach the charter, which does not absolutely have to arrive immediately.

I think I covered this three times already, but I'll say it again. JAMSNET would NOT end the WMD threat, but it is an important tool none the less. Just because a vest will not protect your head from damage, it is no excuse not to wear a vest at all.

This network would make WMD use far more difficult, cumbersome, and more easily detected and countered. Long-range cruise missiles could be destroyed by JAMSNET and short-range cruise missiles probably wont contain WMDs (as it would require the transport to get close to its target and likely be sacrificed in the ensuring mass destruction).

JAMSNET would not stop WMDs, but that does not mean it is an ineffective tool.

Rotaretilbo wrote:In short, we would be spending excessive amounts of money and would not really be properly hindering anyone who might be breaking the law by launching a weapon of mass destruction. The trade off simply does not seem worth it.

We would certainly be hindering anyone who wishes to use WMDs. This network would require an infiltration or invasion for WMDs to be used, which is an important first step for the World Union.



At this point in the game, it is too late to prevent nations from gaining WMD technology. What we must now focus on is how to prevent the use of these weapons. There is no single end-all solution. JAMSNET will help deal with a major part of the problem, and we can work on other projects to fill the gaps. Without taking this first step, though, we are encouraging behavior that absolutely will lead to the end of the world. I hardly think it's a difficult choice.

"Actually if you were to fire a cruise missile 10 miles into a city from just off the coast, it certainly wouldn't be in flight long enough to destroy it from orbit, and if it was loaded with, say, a nerve gas, it would not remotely effect the ship that launched said missile, especially if it was a submarine."

And why couldn't JAMSNET destroy said missile?

"Well I certainly wouldn't classify 10 miles as long range. On the open ocean that is still within line of sight. Not to mention the technological capability to identify, scan, and target that missile in the space of only a few minutes would be nigh impossible. Not to mention said nerve gas likely wouldn't be destroyed by the laser."

dragoon9105 wrote:(Except for the fact that anyone can obtain them in this game, and in relatively short time, To protect the nations that actually dont want the game to end in nuclear winter a missle defense system needs to be in place.

If someone not in the WU gets nuclear capability right after we clear them of not having it and decides to blow up half a continent then theres nothing we can do without a defense system. Nuking them back wont matter becuase thats what they want, now the world is uninhabitable, everyone not along the equator or on the moon is dead and thus they have won)

((The biggest problem with the proposed system is that it doesn't really solve the issue at hand. An ICBM is probably the easiest delivery system to defeat, the most expensive, and the most obvious. And frankly, we'd probably spend less if we just built a Strategic Missile Defense in every nation.))

CivBase wrote:With a group effort, the costs can be easily overcome. This will not be a problem.

"A waste of money is a waste of money, regardless of how many people are throwing money at it."

CivBase wrote:I fail to see why this cannot be. If a nation launches an ICBM for a reason that the World Union would not support, it is pretty much guaranteed that the missile violates international law and would evoke World Union intervention anyway. Please offer an example situation where an ICBM could be ethically used in which the World Union would deny clearance.

"The issue is not whether or not we would deny clearance, but the fact that any nation wanting to launch a perfectly legal ICBM would have to sit through the notoriously slow World Union bureaucratic process. It would be as ridiculously as requiring every nation to get World Union approval before invading another nation."

CivBase wrote:I think I covered this three times already, but I'll say it again. JAMSNET would NOT end the WMD threat, but it is an important tool none the less. Just because a vest will not protect your head from damage, it is no excuse not to wear a vest at all.

"That is not entirely true. If the vest costs an arm and a leg just to wear, then you should not wear it. JAMSNET does not do enough, given the probable cost."

CivBase wrote:This network would make WMD use far more difficult, cumbersome, and more easily detected and countered. Long-range cruise missiles could be destroyed by JAMSNET and short-range cruise missiles probably wont contain WMDs (as it would require the transport to get close to its target and likely be sacrificed in the ensuring mass destruction).

"An ICBM is defined as a missile with a range exceeding three and a half thousand miles. This is generally achieved through firing the missile through the Kármán line and into space. However, a short-range cruise missiles can still have a range of over one thousand miles, putting the transport well out of range of the effects of the weapon, and would be nearly impossible to destroy, even track, from space. Especially to make a first strike, cruise missiles, conventional bombers, and other delivery methods are much more popular than ICBMs. ICBMs are ideal as a response, because of their exceedingly short flight time, as well as not requiring any posturing of military forces."

CivBase wrote:JAMSNET would not stop WMDs, but that does not mean it is an ineffective tool.

"Given the probable cost, we believe that it is an ineffective tool."

CivBase wrote:We would certainly be hindering anyone who wishes to use WMDs. This network would require an infiltration or invasion for WMDs to be used, which is an important first step for the World Union.

"For ICBMs to be used, you mean. And the whole point is that, for the purposes that the charter deems illegal, to make use of a weapon of mass destruction except in response to the use of a weapon of mass destruction, ICBMs are the least likely to be used as the delivery system. They are expensive, easy to spot, and easy to counter."

CivBase wrote:And why couldn't JAMSNET destroy said missile?

"Because the missile would likely be twenty feet long, a foot in diameter, its launch would likely not produce enough heat to register on a world scan, the missile would be in flight for about a minute, and because it would travel under RADAR. Being off be even a thousandth of a degree would miss such a tiny target at such a long distance, even if you could detect the missile, locate the missile, have a satellite in position, and fire the laser in the minute from launch to landing."

StrictLime wrote:Ok so maybe this system may not be the best, but we cant let a bunch of trigger happy psychopaths run around letting nukes fly like a 747. We NEED something that makes them think twice, maybe even 3 times.

i like how you infer that everyone is a psychopath.

DARTH_ZTNEB wrote:

StrictLime wrote:Ok so maybe this system may not be the best, but we cant let a bunch of trigger happy psychopaths run around letting nukes fly like a 747. We NEED something that makes them think twice, maybe even 3 times.

i like how you infer that everyone is a psychopath.

((I liked the part where you interpreted his point completely wrong.))

DARTH_ZTNEB wrote:

StrictLime wrote:Ok so maybe this system may not be the best, but we cant let a bunch of trigger happy psychopaths run around letting nukes fly like a 747. We NEED something that makes them think twice, maybe even 3 times.

i like how you infer that everyone is a psychopath.

When did i do that, now your just interpreting my words to fit your cause, no i'm saying that any one who thinks they need a shit load of nuclear warheads just to "win" is just plain stupid and we need to stop it.

(You know its probably best if we wait for BB to hit us up with some numbers)

DARTH_ZTNEB wrote:
I agree. I find it annoying that i cant expand without a firm talking to by the WU. Also, I do not plan to use, or even get WMDs. I just like to have my options open. That is all i have to say on the matter. Good day.

(BTW, they dont have a say in if you expand unless you act like an asshat and invade just to conquer, besides its much better to expand via diplomacy, read this if you really want to say something bout the world union https://nations.forumotion.com/t101-world-union-charter .)

I'm sorry, but it seems as though some nations do not fully comprehend the sophistication of this network. It's function is not to prohibit ICBM use; it's function is to prohibit all unauthorized missile strikes. Whether it is 10 miles or 10,000, JAMSNET will be capable of safely identifying and detonating it.

Individual projects for each nation would cost far more than a single effort by the World Union as a whole.

The process for granting clearance will be designed to be quick and efficient. I have already mentioned that we are considering using the security council as means of granting clearance. Further, each individual launch needn't be authorized. A nation request for use of ICBMs against another nation would probably included in the authorization to go to war, in which case unlimited missile use would be granted unless otherwise specified.

Again, this may not be an end-all solution to WMDs, that doesn't mean we shouldn't do it. We need to start working on an anti-WMD system, and this is a critical first step.

Before Germany continues to criticize the speculative price, could I ask that BB declares a cost for the project?

CivBase wrote:I'm sorry, but it seems as though some nations do not fully comprehend the sophistication of this network. It's function is not to prohibit ICBM use; it's function is to prohibit all unauthorized missile strikes. Whether it is 10 miles or 10,000, JAMSNET will be capable of safely identifying and detonating it.

"As I stated before, launching cruise missiles armed with conventional warheads is certainly not illegal under the UUU charter, and as such the World Union can not have a program to destroy them. Unless you amend the charter Gibraltaria simply can not support this program."

(Just like to state that this is a Do anythign you want game, hence if we want a missle defense grid that can detect nuclear bio and chem warheads, its possible, Realism went out the window when people can build massive cities, in antartica of all places)

CivBase wrote:I'm sorry, but it seems as though some nations do not fully comprehend the sophistication of this network. It's function is not to prohibit ICBM use; it's function is to prohibit all unauthorized missile strikes. Whether it is 10 miles or 10,000, JAMSNET will be capable of safely identifying and detonating it.

"Somehow, I doubt that a system of lasers will be able to detect, locate, move into position, target, and shoot down a missile that has a top down surface area of about twenty square feet traveling at well over 500 miles per hour that is literally in the air for about a minute. You'd literally need to flood the entire upper atmosphere with these satellites for it to even be possible, and that's simply not viable."

CivBase wrote:Individual projects for each nation would cost far more than a single effort by the World Union as a whole.

"Individual projects don't have to cover the entire world." (keep in mind, individually, it's 30PP a person)

CivBase wrote:The process for granting clearance will be designed to be quick and efficient. I have already mentioned that we are considering using the security council as means of granting clearance.

"It would still take a day or so to grant clearance in its own right."

CivBase wrote:Further, each individual launch needn't be authorized. A nation request for use of ICBMs against another nation would probably included in the authorization to go to war, in which case unlimited missile use would be granted unless otherwise specified.

"First of all, the only nations required to authorize their wars with the World Union are actual members of the World Union. Second of all, granting clearance for missile use is absolutely useless if we're just taking the nation's word for it that their missile is of the legal sort. What's to stop a nation from requesting to fire some cruise missiles, and then filling them with chemical agents?"

CivBase wrote:Again, this may not be an end-all solution to WMDs, that doesn't mean we shouldn't do it. We need to start working on an anti-WMD system, and this is a critical first step.

"The kind of technology you are talking about is going to be expensive. Very expensive. The capability of shooting down a missile no bigger than a surf board that is traveling below RADAR, was launched with minimal heat expenditure, and is only in the air for about a minute, from space, no less, is not something to bat an eye at."

((the following responses are, of course, out of character as they mostly deal with the structure of the game itself))

Rotaretilbo wrote:Somehow, I doubt that a system of lasers will be able to detect, locate, move into position, target, and shoot down a missile that has a top down surface area of about twenty square feet traveling at well over 500 miles per hour that is literally in the air for about a minute. You'd literally need to flood the entire upper atmosphere with these satellites for it to even be possible, and that's simply not viable.

This game is not based on realism, Rot. All we need is BB's approval and a price tag for something to be possible. We're assuming the use of technology that has not yet been invented, so if you're asking for a detailed schematic for how the system will work, you wont get one.

Rotaretilbo wrote:Individual projects don't have to cover the entire world. (keep in mind, individually, it's 30PP a person)

30 PP a person to create a system that can destroy all missiles in a nation? I doubt that, but even if it were that cheap, why wouldn't we dump the same amount per nation into a system that covers the entire world? At 30 PP a pop, that's 900 PP! I highly doubt this system will go over 900 considering the relative costs of other things in this game.

Rotaretilbo wrote:It would still take a day or so to grant clearance in its own right.

This is a game where every action has to be approved by BB. It will take a day regardless.

Rotaretilbo wrote:First of all, the only nations required to authorize their wars with the World Union are actual members of the World Union.

And so we should allow other nations to wage unjust and immoral wars because they are not a part of the World Union? Using WMDs, none the less? My point was that a nation could ask for permission to use as many missile strikes as necessary just once; a single clearance could allow for multiple strikes.

Rotaretilbo wrote:Second of all, granting clearance for missile use is absolutely useless if we're just taking the nation's word for it that their missile is of the legal sort. What's to stop a nation from requesting to fire some cruise missiles, and then filling them with chemical agents?

We can't prevent fraud, but I did speak earlier of a part of the system which could determine a missile's compounds (in effect, figuring out whether or not it is a WMD or not).

Rotaretilbo wrote:The kind of technology you are talking about is going to be expensive. Very expensive. The capability of shooting down a missile no bigger than a surf board that is traveling below RADAR, was launched with minimal heat expenditure, and is only in the air for about a minute, from space, no less, is not something to bat an eye at.

I'm sorry Rot, but you're beating a dead horse here. You do not determine the price, BB does, and the more you rant about how expensive you think it will be, the more likely it is that BB will make it that expensive. All that you have right now is speculation. Until BB gives a cost, there is no reason to be concerned about the price.



If you're going to a gang war without a weapon and someone offers you a bat, you don't reject the bat because other people will probably have guns. You thank the guy, take the bat, and try to get yourself a better weapon in the mean time.

CivBase wrote:This game is not based on realism, Rot. All we need is BB's approval and a price tag for something to be possible. We're assuming the use of technology that has not yet been invented, so if you're asking for a detailed schematic for how the system will work, you wont get one.

For the most part, though, we're at least using technology that is understandable. We may not have space elevators yet, but we understand how we could. The kind of stuff you're talking about is unlikely, and while we can do whatever we want, don't expect a cheap price tag.

CivBase wrote:30 PP a person to create a system that can destroy all missiles in a nation?

Of course not. But it doesn't have to. All it has to do is eliminate the threat to the builder.

CivBase wrote:I doubt that, but even if it were that cheap, why wouldn't we dump the same amount per nation into a system that covers the entire world?

Because your system isn't going to be that cheap. You're talking about a system of satellites. Now, because satellites aren't exactly particularly fast, and because you'd need to be able to respond to missiles immediately, you'd need tons of them. As it so happens, one laser killsat costs 25 a pop. To effectively cover the Earth, you'd need scores of the things, but lets just call it 50. That, right there, is 1250PP. On top of that, you need to research top of the line scanners to detect these missiles, as well as a supercomputer to direct the entire thing. That research will likely run you about 150PP more, putting it at about 1400PP. And frankly, I'm probably underestimating the cost here.

And all that does is creates a system that pisses off tons of nations, who now need our permission to launch perfectly legal cruise missiles, but probably doesn't work very well (BB has stated in the past that just because you research something doesn't mean it works the way you say it does) and, in the end, doesn't really do an effective job at eliminating the WMD problem. We'd probably be much better off throwing that whole lot of PP into investigations and espionage to deal with the WMD problem.

CivBase wrote:At 30 PP a pop, that's 900 PP! I highly doubt this system will go over 900 considering the relative costs of other things in this game.

First of all, where are you getting 30 as the number of members of the UUU? Right now, there are 25 by my count. So that's 750PP. And while the research itself might not cost that, actually building an effective system of laser killsats will.

CivBase wrote:This is a game where every action has to be approved by BB. It will take a day regardless.

That is irrelevant, because BB has to approve the action either way. It takes an extra day with your system, at the least. And that's assuming we just take their word for it and say go ahead.

CivBase wrote:And so we should allow other nations to wage unjust and immoral wars because they are not a part of the World Union?

Of course not. But it is not the prerogative of the World Union to literally hold everyone's hand. We are not the world government, and it is not fair for us to say "you can't do this or this or this or this without our permission." We're probably stretching it by requiring World Union permission to own WMDs. There is obviously a moral justification in banning WMDs, but is there no moral quandary in ruling over other people who have no representation here with an iron fist? It is neither feasible nor fair for us to attempt to prevent every unjust war by severely limiting the declaration of war. What is feasible and fair is to stop any unjust war we can, and to prevent any unjust war we can, without severely hampering people waging completely just wars.

CivBase wrote:Using WMDs, none the less?

What? My point was concerning people having to authorize their wars with the World Union, which is entirely unfeasible. It was further about people having to authorize legal missiles with the World Union, which is also entirely unfeasible. It had nothing to do with legitimizing the use of WMDs in war.

CivBase wrote:My point was that a nation could ask for permission to use as many missile strikes as necessary just once; a single clearance could allow for multiple strikes.

And my point stands. Let's say Randomakistan is invaded by Hostilokistan, and Randomakistan decides it wants to shoot a cruise missile at a strategic target in Hostilokistan. It sits around waiting our permission for a day, all the while people are dying in the field due to this delay.

Now, let's say we grant permission. What stops Randomakistan from then loading a chemical agent of mass destruction into this approved missile and targeting a city? There is no oversight. We've literally achieved nothing, other than to prevent a repeat offender from using missiles, which we probably could have done anyway without spending hundreds of PP on some convoluted system. I mean, if Randomakistan uses a chemical weapon on Hostilokistan, whether or not JAMSNET was in place, there will be severe repercussions against Randomakistan. Between the systems and networks we already have up, I doubt Randomakistan will ever launch another missile again, let alone a chemical weapon. All JAMSNET achieves is automating the process, and likely for an excessively overdone pricetag.

CivBase wrote:We can't prevent fraud, but I did speak earlier of a part of the system which could determine a missile's compounds (in effect, figuring out whether or not it is a WMD or not).

Oh, so now we have scanners that can see through lead or similar metal, and determine the molecular structure of a tiny compartment in a fast moving missile that is, itself, rather small? Detecting a chemical or biological warhead from a conventional one is pretty much impossible. And by impossible, I mean God awful expensive. Probably an extra couple of hundred PP to research and implement.

And frankly, if we do bother spending the extra on this, why shoot down every missile in the first place?

CivBase wrote:I'm sorry Rot, but you're beating a dead horse here. You do not determine the price, BB does, and the more you rant about how expensive you think it will be, the more likely it is that BB will make it that expensive. All that you have right now is speculation. Until BB gives a cost, there is no reason to be concerned about the price.

BB isn't here, and price is one of the only real reasons to oppose anything. Because, as you pointed out, we can do anything we want. We could develop a nerve agent that causes all humans to become incredibly smart, efficient, and peaceful. Is that feasible? Of course not. Why not? Because it would be fucking expensive.

CivBase wrote:If you're going to a gang war without a weapon and someone offers you a bat, you don't reject the bat because other people will probably have guns. You thank the guy, take the bat, and try to get yourself a better weapon in the mean time.

But we're not being offered a bat. We're considering buying a bat, when we could probably get a sawn off for cheaper. The guy selling us the bat is laughing his ass off, because he knows we're unarmed and will scramble to get whatever we can, and so he's hiked up the price. If we just take the time to run to a gun store, we'll be fine.

This argument is pointless. I will not continue until BB gives a price (which you seem to be determined to make as big as possible).

None of you have countered my point on the legality of this venture...

JAMSNET will have the capability of shooting down short-range cruise missiles, but it will not do so automatically. For instance, though, we could use it against Manchurian cruise missiles.

Measure 1.8 covers the rest of the legality issues.

And what exactly is Measure 1.8?

It would have taken you less time to go read it than it would have to make that post.