Compiled Aff Answers


Impact D – ABLs = Effective



Download 1.62 Mb.
Page8/148
Date19.10.2016
Size1.62 Mb.
#5065
1   ...   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   ...   148

Impact D – ABLs = Effective


ABL works – really well

Brinton 10 (Turner Space News June 18 http://www.spacenews.com/military/100618-airborne-laser-gears-for-next-shoot-down-test.html TBC 7/6/10)

Boeing Defense, Space & Security of St Louis is the ABL prime contractor; Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems of Los Angeles developed the high-power chemical laser; and Lockheed Martin developed the beam control/fire control system. The modified Boeing 747-400 aircraft made its long-awaited debut in February. In one test flight, the ABL fired on and destroyed a boosting sounding rocket known as a MARTI. Eight days later, the aircraft succeeded in its first attempt to shoot down a threat-representative, liquid-fueled target missile. During the same flight test, it fired on a second liquid-fueled missile, but a problem caused the weapon system to shut itself down before the target was destroyed. The MDA will not reveal the aircraft’s distance from its target in any of those tests. The most important lessons from the ABL’s first intercept tests were that it actually worked, and it was more efficient and lethal than expected, said U.S. Air Force Col. Robert McMurry, the MDA’s ABL program manager. “What I think it’s proven is the beam control system and the atmospheric compensation and the power out of the laser are all working extraordinarily well to put power on target,” McMurry said in a June 16 interview.


ABL is key to protect vulnerable infrastructure

Spencer and Carafano 4 (Jack and James, Research fellow and Deputy Director of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2004/08/The-Use-of-Directed-Energy-Weapons-to-Protect-Critical-Infrastructure, date accessed: 7/6/2010) AJK
America's critical infrastructure--e.g., power plants, transportation hubs, and telecommunications facilities--is becoming increasingly vulnerable to precision missile attacks. Guided missile technology and the missiles themselves have been available for years, but the emergence of global terror networks, sophisticated smuggling techniques, and the post-September 11 security environment have made the threat of precision missile attacks even more serious. While technology transfer legislation and international agree-ments may help to control the spread of some technologies, relying solely on these mechanisms is wholly insufficient, especially when proliferation has already occurred. Therefore, it is essential that the United States actively defend its most vital nodes of critical infrastructure. 1 To be effective against close-range missile attacks, such defenses must be cost efficient, safe, and swift. Although the United States is not currently prepared to protect domestic targets against these threats, it does have the technology to do so with directed-energy weapons (DEWs), which include lasers, microwaves, electromagnetic pulses, and high intensity radio frequency waves. In 2000, for example, the Army used the Tactical High Energy Laser to shoot down a rocket carrying a live warhead--the first time a laser has destroyed a missile in flight. To ensure that these promising technologies are effectively fielded in a timely manner: Congress should fully fund directed-energy programs; The Department of Defense (DOD) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) should cooperate fully on their respective directed-energy efforts;1 DHS should conduct a national needs assessment of critical infrastructure; and The United States should facilitate the sharing of directed-energy technology with its allies.

Impact D – ABLs = Efficient


ABLs are cost efficient

Rayburn 10 (Maj. Gen. Bentley B., is the former commandant of the Air War College March 5 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/05/killing-airborne-laser-jeopardizes-america/ TBC 7/6/10)

Airborne laser defenses are a model of cost-benefit success, costing less than $5 billion over 15 years. While it may be difficult to quantify the deterrent effects of missile defense, we know how terribly expensive a single terrorist strike or a barrage of missiles coming from terrorist safe havens can be. At the very least, the Pentagon should restore the Airborne Laser project to full funding, add money to explore additional applications of the technology and, once the system has proven through further testing that it is capable and reliable, make the single prototype aircraft available to the military during high-threat emergency situations.

**China DA – Aff Answers


SCO Good – Separatism, Sino/Indo/Russian Relations

Expansion of the SCO is critical to China’s fight against separatism and domestic terrorism, as well as relations with Russia and India
Niazi 2007

(Tarique Niazi is an Environmental Sociologist at the University of Wisconsin at Eau Claire, “Pushback to Unilateralism: the China-India-Russia Alliance”, Foreign Policy In Focus, December 20, http://www.fpif.org/articles/pushback_to_unilateralism_the_china-india-russia_alliance)


The major manifestation of this deepening alliance was the SCO-wide military maneuvers, dubbed as "Peace Mission 2007." These maneuvers were conducted on August 9-17, 2007 in Chelyabinsk in Russia's Urals region, followed by its final phase carried out in Urumuqi, Xinjiang, China. The exercises involved 6,500 troops, 80 aircraft and 500 combat vehicles from China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. China and Russia supplied all of the combat vehicles, as well as 3,700 troops. "For the SCO...the war games mark its most ambitious attempt yet to build an integrated military-security apparatus to complement expanding political and commercial collaboration."26 Some observers suspect that Peace Mission 2007 "resembles less of an anti-terrorism drill than a full-scale, state-on-state conventional fight."27 The SCO has never held a full-scale military exercise involving all member states, although China and Russia have held several joint exercises under the auspices of the SCO. In 2005, they held large-scale amphibious landings on China's Yellow Sea Coast, which many observers believed were intended for Chinese separatists in Taiwan.28 These maneuvers, however, were massive in their scope as they were conducted on land, in air, and at sea in southeast of the Shandong Peninsula in China. The stated goal of each drill--held in 2007 and 2005--was to fight separatism and terrorism. China faces problems of separatism in Tibet and Taiwan, and terrorism in Xinjiang, while Russia is confronted with the twin menace in the wide swath of its northern territories. Similarly, India is battling enduring separatist movements in its west and northeast. Although India, which is an observer at the SCO, sat out of the 2007 drills, it was scheduled to hold joint army exercises with China in December 2007 in its southwestern province of Yunnan.29 The planned exercises are being billed as "historic" since the two giants have come a long way from active hostilities to strategic partnership. In their luncheon meeting in Singapore on November 21, 2007, Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao and Indian Prime Minister Man Mohan Singh further signified the import of these exercises by reiterating their commitment "to take their strategic cooperative partnership to a next level."30 Prime Minister Singh, in his statement, added that "India and China ties are beyond and above bilateral matters. They are related to peace, stability and prosperity in the region and the world beyond...India and China are...friends and partners."31 The Indian Prime Minister, who has just returned from his state visit to Moscow, is now scheduled to visit China early next year.


Download 1.62 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   ...   148




The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message

    Main page