you questioned the competency of the singaporeans when they selected the F15 over the Rafale.....  are you suggesting that they continued on with this display of technical negligence by selecting ASTER?

I am aware of the SM-2s ABM shortcomings, cretin. It still works as designed which all your ranting above does not demonstrate that ASTER does at ALL. You condemn the apple for not being golden and then claim that a PoS which you proclaim is an apple is better than the apple? Well, an apple [STANDARD] is still an apple and a PoS [ASTER] is still a  PoS and  you continue your LYING  scholastic rhetorical tricks.;. The subject PoS is ASTER. It is not the apple, STANDARD. If you could prove that ASTER wasn't a PoS you would discuss ASTER as I do, when I discuss its shortcomings. However you would rather claim that ASTER is better because the French PoJ ships, the Laugh-it-ups come with the crap ASTER missile sold to Singapore; ASTER which fails even more miserably against the very same  GAO described threats as in NO ABM DEFENSE CAPABILITY AT ALL. At least STANDARD has SOME.


Now, cretin, let me call you a LIAR for the tenth time this week as you again demonstrate your basic intellectual dishonesty.


Was DCN  or THALES going to install a US rocket aboard a French warship?  No. Why? Ask yourself this question..................just how much is THALES or MBDA trusted by RAYTHEON? HMMMMMMMMMMMM?

You are incredibly stupid, FS.

I lay the banquet out and you just don't get it.

Bribes, technology theft, incompetence, thievery, POLITICS; you cannot ignore that when you bring up something WEAK like this.

Produce some actual science that shows that ASTER works; cretin, as I have that shows it does not.. Don't try your scholastic tricks on me. I am a better scholasticist as well as a better empiricist than you can ever hope to be googleboy.


And don't selectively quote either, liar.

Here is the text in FULL;


Appendix II
Assessments of Selected Equipment Items
Page 79 GAO-04-112 Military Readiness
Condition
We assessed the condition of the Standard Missile?2 as red because it failed
to meet the asset readiness goal of 87 percent and only 2 of 5 variants
achieved the goal in fiscal year 2002. The asset readiness goal is the missile
equivalent of mission capable goals. The percent of non-ready for issue
missiles (currently at 23 percent of the inventory) will increase because of
funding shortfalls.
Program Strategy
We assessed the program strategy for the Standard Missile-2 as yellow
because the Navy has developed a long-term program strategy for
upgrading the Standard Missile-2 inventory; however, the Navy?s strategy
mitigates risk with complementary systems as the SM-2 inventory draws
down and upgrades to counter known threats are cut from the budget. In
2002, the Navy cancelled production of the most capable variant at the
time, the SM-2 Block IVA. Currently, the most capable missile is the SM-2
Block IIIB, which is the only variant in production. This missile will be the
main anti-air warfare weapon on board Navy ships into the next decade.
Improved Block IIIB missiles will be available in 2004. The SM-6 Extended
Range Active Missile (ERA

It is interesting that Borat should conclude the SM2 is "obsolete against sea skimmers" when what the GAO report states is that the existing SM2 Block IIIB is not as capable as the Block IV against long-range threats or ballistic missiles.  Indeed, the GAO report makes absolutely no mention whatsoever of the SM2's ability against that type of threat.

It is also interesting that he should conclude Aster is superior, when Aster has no ABM or extended range (compared to a Standard) capability at all.

The real conclusions to be drawn from the GAO report regarding the SM2 are that: in 2002, funding for USN SAMs was insufficient, and that at that time the GAO believed the USN should have more ABM capability.