As I read this piece by Theresa Hitchens at Breaking Defense, describing the potential of directed-energy weapons:
Current DE systems under development for countering unmanned aerial systems (c-UAS) have ranges “nearing 1 kilometer,†AFRL’s study explains, as opposed to other types of counter-UAS capabilities — such as net guns and shotguns — which are only effective at “10s of meters ranges.â€
and
“By 2060 we can predict that DE systems will become more effective, and this idea of a force field includes methods to destroy other threats too,†he said. “Eventually there may be potential to achieve the penultimate goal of a Nuclear or ballistic missile umbrella. It’s fun to think about what that might be in 2060, but we don’t want to speculate too much.â€
I could only think “How much energy would a weapons system capable of defending a military base require?” You can’t do that with solar power. I can only speculate that it would require nuclear fission or fusion or some method of producing power that hasn’t been invented yet.
No, no you can’t.
Solar power and windmills are really a step back, not forward.
I don’t know if the fear of nuclear war will give us another 40 years of detente. by then I will be, … plus four, carry the naught,,, oh. Never mind.
I don’t honestly know the answer to that question. I think it depends on whom you are trying to deter. I don’t believe the Iranians are deterrable and I have my doubts about the Chinese for different reasons. I think that the ruling elite of the mullahocracy genuinely believes that God is on their side and will protect them. I think the Chinese authorities have little use for the ordinary Chinese. What if 1 million, 10 million, or even 100 million die? There are plenty more them. To deter China you’d need a much more focused deterrence or the willingness and ability to destroy the country utterly I don’t think either one of those is going to materialize for the foreseeable future.
Set your phasers on kill………