All right It's a good one Memes says probably be considered investing in Bitcoin mining companies or do you prefer a straight Bitcoin purchasing now? I've we me and meme know some friends who are into Bitcoin mining and You got to navigate those waters and you got to be very very sharp and if you don't know exactly what you're doing You're going to be underwater quickly so Bitcoin mining companies sure like but Didn't they just there's a couple ones that I I like like Mara marathon and things like that that looked pretty good Raya blockchain, but you know they'll take a hit so over time It might be a good way if you don't want to buy Bitcoin to get into that me personally. I would just rather Buy Bitcoin so not so much the companies, but it's not a bad play. Just not my thing William Davison what happens in my counting coin base and then move to the UK nothing But we did a video a couple days ago And I talked about how I just don't see the point of coin base sticking around here for America and really pushing that narrative When they when everybody knows they're going to get sued So like you get a Wells notice from the SEC and they're just going to you know Really rip into you for a long time. It's not it's pricey It's not pricey for the government to bring a lawsuit, but it is pricey for you to fight that one So I don't think they're going to go that I don't think they're going to leave totally But I think if I was coin base, I would and especially with And we talked about this in the last NFA live show We talked about the global liquidity and how it was being increased in the Asian countries you would see Liquidity increase China Japan Korea and then you look over here in the United States and liquidity is decreasing So if I was a company and I could I had the ability to go global Why would I stick around in America where I'm getting scrutinized every which way? Why wouldn't I just branch off like well, you know, we'll still support you guys as best we can but You're the past and this is the future me personally. I just don't see why they're sticking around to grow Paul says Voyager bureaucracy forms for me to play during game voyages another one Voyager and then people keep asking me about voyager and Binance us so Look voyager. It looks like that is going to be able to go through It looks like they came to a resolution with the US government. Thanks, US government for allowing us to get our funds back and You're gonna be able to opt in if you're in Texas like I am you're not gonna be able to opt into Binance us unless Binance us gets a money transmitter license to my knowledge so far They've not been able to do that what that means is that if you live in Texas and other others different states I forget the specific ones you will not be getting your crypto back. You'll be getting cash back. So wait for more News about that one and go from there Members are more likely to be gifted memberships. I guess so You blue check marker this comes from if you follow me on Twitter I Don't understand the issue between everybody and the blue check marks and Quite honestly people are all up in arms about having to buy a blue check mark for Twitter And I'm just like I don't get it. I don't see it What's the problem? Right? Like I tried to get verified from on Twitter for over a year Just pass me by you know, I'll try to get verified on Twitter for a long time Charles Hoskinson and you know who got the blue check mark an impersonator, so I was like well, this is just a sham and Now we come along.  They were working on the bugs in the beginning. I think it's a bit better now Correct me if I'm wrong. I'd like someone to you know what I would like someone to do this try to go to Twitter and sign up as news asset or digital asset news and try to pay with your credit card or debit card However, you would pay for that eight dollars and see what happens see if they're going to let you in So like for me, I just look at them like it's a company. They're trying to make money I think it was valued at 44 billion now. It's valued at I think 22 or 23 billion So it's like half so if you've ever run a company or any business You know that it's kind of important for revenue to come in so I'm not saying that You know, this is the greatest thing of all time. I'm like I don't get so maybe I'm being ridiculous but Trying to make a buck and I think we're in a free market Before anybody laughs go really we're in a free market. Go to China. Tell me how how free you think it is over there. That's it Rob said acne look You can do it you can try on Twitter you can try it on YouTube. It's not like I've stopped anybody That's not to not to actually accurate There's always gonna be impersonators Actually, I think and if you take a look at like my comments section some other comments section I think I have less bots now. They don't get eliminated immediately. Sometimes it takes like a couple minutes or so, but not too bad Yeah What is going on with that ceiling fan? It's just a green screen. Don't worry about that. So let's see go down for life You know I Don't know what that was Do you see this is a good one? Do you see the government in a different light after you got into crypto? I think I was really posing the a thirteenth in government. I Got into crypto in 2017 so I was already on the border with politicians and what they're able to do and not able to do but Yeah, I mean you know starting a channel and doing these things that kind of forces you to do a lot more research and and Data hunting to see just where your investments go It's actually not a bad idea So if you want to start a channel I highly recommend it it'll force you to do things you probably wouldn't do and one of those things you really take a Stern look at politicians and the government itself and like if you're here right now You probably don't trust the government 100% I'm just gonna guess and that's why you're here and as time goes on I see the the hypocrisy that goes on through all governments and This time has gone on. I've adapted one phrase. I think it's pretty accurate, which is the same thing as models All models are wrong and some are useful Sending with politicians all politicians are wrong all of them and only some are useful So really if you're taking a look at politicians, they really are just tools. That's all I see them as and I see them as I will vote for the ones that Hopefully Can do what they say they can do and move from there now some people say well Rob That's very naive because I don't do anything look you gotta do something You had a either you would need to run for office and shut up Or you need to vote for the people that you think will do the best job So take your pick or you can sit at home and don't do anything. It's up to you Some people say I just don't do anything So for me like I look at it and I you know, I'm just trying to find the Representative that'll push the agenda that I feel is the best thing for it. So that's it. So as far as that and Yeah, it's changed me a little bit. I should say but not to where I'm like Like I totally believe in government. I was like, this is the awesome most awesome thing ever quite honestly It's sometimes it's just a real ass show Benny hey, so I've been talking with plan B and he had the worst issues getting a blue check mark for many months And recently he got so I wonder if the rules got looser Rules got looser because really all you got to do is you pay dollars You verify you are who you say you are and they take your payment information very simple.  I just gave you all the information. So then of course Thankfully, Benny would actually help out and and get rid of all most of the scammers that are out there I think it's much better now than it used to be but yeah, that's it The Shaolin said I lived in China for eight years So tell me what it's like Because all I hear is the stuff that is on the internet. Who knows if that's true Who is Jarky? He's the greatest person of all time and he gives memberships and if you did it again, thank you Jarky. We appreciate it. That's awesome crypto needs red bull house flappy coming on around pretty good talking to a lot of Platforms and it looks like I don't know might be we talked to scale and talked to file coin and We talked to some other ones, but it looks like we're narrowed down to Polygon and moon beam. So we'll see how that works out. But yeah Flappy is gonna be a web 2 web 3 game. That's all I can tell you Just a game just a game is that a green screen green screen Also birds aren't real That's the cool. I've earned that long time you to John. We definitely have a face for ready and a voice for print Yeah, I know what he cares about that. Ah Jarky's back. I Bought a house in Argentina for Bitcoin long the crypto never using fiat again unless I need you know There was a company that just opened up that's taken Bitcoin for real estate interesting. I wonder if that's a top Probably is on that super back. I don't give it any politicians. It's just a You might as well just throw sand on the ocean. That's about as it's about as worthless as doing that Yeah, Chrissy then says Hey, Robert is Google Coinbase. They have a hundred million clients. Most of them are USA Do you really think they would close up and lose all those funds at Bitcoin's equality it would sell? Yeah, I don't think they'd close per se, but I think if you had a choice to leave America or Spend all your time here and really make things work, but then just branch out. What would you do? That's what that's how I see it And they're gonna they're gonna go through a fight with the SEC just like ripple is and whoever else comes by Birds aren't able to even that's true. Oh Wow Look at that. China's like living in controlled chaos You can do just about anything as long as you don't say anything bad about the government. Wow So that's true. I had a ton of fun But recently the fascism fascism and censorship got too real crazy ETH prediction. This is my specialty ETH In the year of 2023 will be between the price of ten dollars and 10,000 Got it Nailed it. Is there a chance that Gary gets removed doesn't seem like he's gonna step back by himself He's not going to step down. I will tell you that but I Was a politician's multiple politicians are calling for him to step down and actually to pass a bill To get him removed. We'll see if it works out. Who knows try hard. It's did you hear about fidelity internationals decentralized deployment? interesting fidelity You know, I was interesting when fidelity started offer There are products related to digital assets I remember the the government's came in and would say, you know, you really shouldn't do that You really shouldn't offer that to the public and they said, well, well, thank you government But we are a private company. So we'll do whatever we want to do. That was awesome You know, I was thinking about this Joshua Curris is in my opinion. I don't trust Peter Schiff Kevin O'Leary fools go You know for one thing about Peter Schiff who talks about gold a lot I don't really care if I own gold I own silver. I own Bitcoin. I just I'm amazed at how much he has in stocks And not gold for as much as he talks about it so At least he's honest It just doesn't really make it very public. So What? Hey, Roddy ever hear from digital Dave hasn't posted a video on YouTube in six months. Really? Mmm. Hope he's okay Maybe he's too busy playing paddle ball or poke a ball in Thailand Sean new to crypto how does tax on crypto's work in the United States? It all comes down to taxable events Moving your crypto from one wallet to another wallet is not a taxable event. However, using your crypto For to buy goods and or services is a taxable event Also, if you transfer or transform one crypto another crypto that is a taxable event meaning if you bought Bitcoin 10 years ago And it was that a hundred bucks or whatever it was and then today you bought a theorem at two thousand That would be a taxable event from those two parts and that's the really the big thing and Then also you have to take a look at capital gains tax So capital gains a short-term and long-term long-term is over a year Short-term is less than that and if you're a short-term capital gains, it's all depending on your tax bracket Whatever that is twenty one twenty eight thirty four forty four percent whatever it is And you pay that when you sell off your crypto But there was an interesting post. I thought was interesting from coin ledger and They're a sponsor of the show For tax software they said that you can gift Not your wife or your spouse like that, but you can gift members of your family crypto and it becomes Tax-free Because you gifted it to them so Just something to throw out there Hey, Robbie think about Algram being named the bit tricks case with the SEC Well, it's a problem and also it's a problem for holders of I trust so I trust capital sponsor of the show For a Roth IRA just so everybody knows for algorand they have frozen algorand So you can't you can't you can transfer it out if you want to that's a taxable event because it's a Roth IRA But you can't sell or buy right now because of the people that they use for custody services aren't allowing it And it's the same thing that happened with XRP if you had I trust Back in the day with you know, and you had XRP now you can't buy it or sell it So just say thank you SEC because that's what's going on now. You're not you're not gonna lose it It's just there and you can't really do much with it right now again If you want to take that tax liability you can take it out from I trust if you really want to and you have to fill out a form You'll take it out put into your wallet and sell it if you want to but I don't know Why you do that right now? Yeah Troy Harris says did you hear I've heard about Fidele's metaverse deployment as on their or their tokenized bond What do you think about that either one so metaverse writes that right now metaverse play There was just an article that just came out about metaverse, especially like the sandbox and how much Concentration of users they have and they thought they were gonna have like thousands of thousands and it was like Like a couple hundred and something like that. So metaverse plays right now I don't really see him now blockchain gaming web through gaming. I can definitely get into that I'm getting into that more the casual games and things like that as far as tokenized bonds if they want to do it and whichever Chain it's actually on that's exactly what Larry Fink said Who is the? Head of Blackrock. He said the future is tokenized assets and that's where they're going in big The big question is what are they going to base that on is that going to be on a layer one like? Avalanche or Cordano or Ethereum right now looks like actually I can't really even guess We'll find out and that's why I invest into layer one solutions more so than anything else Cosmo feel free to give me some Bitcoin. What's your opinion on cosmos? I think it's pretty good Did you know That's remember that crypto called Luna You know Luna was was built on cosmos or tendermen and When Luna collapsed did you see any other problems with any other chains? Like the crypto comm token and some other ones went off without a hitch. So I gotta tell you with that much massive collapse and Cosmos was able to handle that the ecosystem which was let's be honest Luna was a pretty massive collapse and nothing really affected it Looks pretty good JP Morgan coin in Australia moving crypto is a taxable event as he does this those of huh, it's weird What am I moving it from one wall to another wall be a taxable event because if you move it from one wall to one wallet It just stays the same price Hmm be a leery of leery Dexon some tomato coin Those were the days that jockey says what crypto? It goes for auditioning is crazy. You can transfer a crypto to the black market and get 450 paces instead of 220 Hmm, so if you fragile travel here, just take your crypto and don't use your card I'm not gonna recommend To do that, but that's just what jockey says. So interesting Sandstorms are real in China Shannon's got a good question. I'm gonna tell you why CBDCs can be tracked by governments and turn on and off by government Why would other countries ever use it how we're going to do international trade? So there's two things every time about CBDCs Every country is gonna have their own CBDC, right?  How many countries trust each other? so for me like I look at Russia India China Japan Korea North and South like how many those actually America UK different parts. How many of those countries trust each other and are gonna say yeah, we'll use that I Just don't know if that's gonna happen I think for a time like because Russia wants to get around the sanctions So they won't do pretty much whatever they can do to get away from that And of course that'll lead them to you know, bending the knee to China using the digital you on fine And then of course the OPEC countries, you know, they're bear emirates and things like that They'll be on board with that because they're sick of America and different things that we do But the question is how long is that gonna last and then here's the next question CBDCs Well, first of all people talk about CBDCs like the worst thing in the world They're not, you know why they're not? because As people start to use them all it takes is one time for the government to screw up and they'll do it because they're not perfect Obviously and just takes for one government to turn off the tap Meaning they start to go to use CBDCs people like oh, this is so cool I got this like digital money. I can transfer now. It's super simple. I love it And then all of a sudden you're on social media and you hear about all these people or people in random Random pockets getting their funds turned off and they can't afford heat electricity food for whatever reason right and whatever country that is How long do you think it is before people like and here's the prime example When the banks collapsed silicone valley bank and signature When it was three Silvergate When those three collapsed how many people called you and started to talk about hey What's up with this crypto digital assets because I just heard about these banks that are collapsing and people just lost their funds Should I get into that? How many of you had that that was a very short amount of time And the reason was because of social media now take it now extrapolate that and then you got all these people who are talking about Oh, we just heard about the CBDC, which was great It's been doing good for six months or a year or whatever else and they just shut it off And now people can't afford this or this or this maybe I should get out of the system in some way I can use cash You know because it's hard to cut down on cash. I can use gold and silver But also maybe I use something a little bit more digital because that's what I'm used to on my smartphone and my computer And what do I have? I have crypto digital assets So, I mean it just this is why I am like people are like, why are you for a cbdc? I'm not for a cbdc But if it comes out just give them enough rope and they'll hang themselves. I don't see the problem I think that's it And then people are like, what is it? What does a membership give me at digital asset news youtube channel? Absolutely nothing Uh, I think it's like two bucks. Jarchy gives him out. I appreciate it. I think you get like a little Icon next to your name That's pretty much it Yeah, I'm pretty pretty high flyer But good news you don't need a membership Uh to go over to to dan teaches crypto It's 100 free and all as I require is an email. So That's uh That's free and always will be free XRP Perfect timing. Thanks for your free website. You're welcome. I actually just just Let me show you what it looks like And a collective groan goes across the crowd That's okay Hey, here's it. Look at that Free website Start learning big orange button click that I'll log in Dan And I just started this And like it's the it's like I go over the basic safety how to not get screwed over Investing stuff like I think this is the most this is the most heavily watched module Why we invest is my gaitui the rules. Why have them risk? Why dollar cost average? my exit strategy And then when and why i'm selling 80% of all my crypto So there's that one, but I just added this one Uh gaming This is the video of me and stash the reason why i'm talking about gaming so much We did a video not too long ago and I talked about how You know many gamers there are in the world first of all, you know the world population It's like seven and a half billion somewhere around there give or take Half a billion seven and a half billion the only gamers people who play games 3 billion 3.1 billion I know it seems like a lot, but here's here's the thing. You know people have smartphones Or flee over 70 of the entire population of the world. Maybe it might be 80 now. I'm not for sure But think about people who have like computers not even like high high You know high frequency are really great even like older computers older phones or whatever else they have games on there so casual gamers There's 1.5 It's out of the 3.1 billion people. It's 1.5 billion people and they're mostly in asian countries So imagine like a game a casual game that you can play Which you don't play that much But just enough to play a little bit and then maybe earn some crypto like a play to earn or win to earn Maybe that might be something to look into Just saying cbd sees inflation and steroids. Yeah Top three alt pepe Whatever that coin is that meme coin. It was number one The last couple days will remain number one. Who knows? I have no idea Farmer g says robby think tex is a good place to raise a family. Absolutely the people are great Is there a book banning body you tell me a state that doesn't ban books Certain books whatever books and is that in every single county? Not for sure Just because they ban a book doesn't mean you can't tell it to your kids I'm not sure about that one about what you're getting to farra, but sure I am a horrible boss And i'm also terminally unemployable. I can't work for anybody else I gave that life up 15 eight eight years ago thanks office What do you think of asset managers and banks want to use cbd sees as a cash leg for a tokenized asset? Shows the money market fund. What do you think is a good alternative? I mean they can do that they can use cbd sees and work it all out And might actually work out for them the thing is again if they do that They have to Get it across nationwide and maybe it actually works out But then maybe somebody like I don't really want to do that with my my funds People do whatever they want to but as far as a tokenized asset with cbd sees What's the benefit if you think about it Because I mean the whole great thing about having things decentralized is not in an essentialized location. It's not it doesn't So if you have a cbd see it's all run by the government so what's the difference between that and Doing anything with like the regular banks the great thing about having things in different ledges all across the country Is then it can be verifiable and backed up and things like that. So if they want to do it They can do it. I just don't think it's the greatest move for them I'm skeptical with channeler sharing relative knowledge for hundreds of dollars. It's free market. Everybody can do what they want to do Lackland nickel says rob. Do you think the bottom is in? I don't think the bottom is in and I think we've got lower to go. However having said that I Been wrong before and because I've been wrong before I still dollar cost average every day. So it's the same thing It's it's bitcoin ethereum avalanche cardano Polygon chain link in the host of other ones that I buy every single day Because I don't know which one's going to be the winner moving forward and If I'm wrong and the bottom isn't in and it goes up Well, you know, I've been dollar cost averaging this whole time. I dollar cost average in 2022 Although some of those for some of that timeframe. I was doing a micro DCing, which is less less amounts but When the last one When we were hitting 17 19 I was regular dollar cost averaging and it doesn't really it doesn't really matter It doesn't it doesn't matter what I do quite honestly. It's whatever you do. This is what I do And as time goes on I think in the next two three years. I'll be rewarded for dollar cost averaging and if I'm right and things go down great then it goes down and those Those orders just keep getting executed More money. Yes, the bottom is in I further bottom is in from a lot of people I also heard people say You know the bottom was yeah, how many times have you heard this? This is the last time you're going to be able to buy bitcoin below 20k And how many times did it go below 20k in 2022 and 2023? And that's it My guy There's a guy who knows a guy There's a 20k again. That's it. There's one Have you have you seen upland me? What's your thoughts on virtual real estate game? With your assets in the blockchain be careful with that because think about this for all the difference Virtual worlds like how hard is it to recreate those? You know So I mean like look at Decentraland and look at sandbox and Look at there's another one called crypt overs not Ben's thing one other thing And there's a plethora of other ones that are out there and they're all just being created And now are they all going to be valuable? No, it's just like websites, you know, are all websites valuable? No, there's a bunch of them and very few actually are super profitable So just be careful with that one because you know only time will tell good luck Anyhow, that's it for today. So like if you like today's video thumbs up and subscribe all the good stuff But that is it. Thanks for coming by for the second one See you guys on the next video. Adios


the future and what we think we are going to do about those challenges. I came to the missile defense mission just a few years after President Reagan challenged the nation to look at ways that we might solve the problem of defending our nation against the ballistic missiles as opposed to avenging our nation. And so I came back as a young rocket propulsion engineer from the Air Force with about 130 of my compatriots, I see several of them here in the audience today, with the goal of sponsoring research and really capitalizing on the creativity and the innovation in our industry, in our academia, in our national laboratories to go after that challenge. So we made a bet in those days, I think it was on the order of about $2 billion or so a year in research, research in a broad spectrum of technologies and areas that would hopefully pay off down the road and get us that sort of capability. And so there was a great focus broadly, that is an interesting term, great focus broadly on those technologies which might pay off in the future for us. Some of those didn't pan out, some of those did much better than others. We were looking at a lot of things. As you might recall, we were looking at nuclear-pumped lasers, we were looking at high-powered microwaves, we were looking at rockets, we were looking at, of course, in my own case, we were looking at electromagnetic rail guns, giant 100-ton satellites that would launch small projectiles at 20 kilometers per second at a rain of 10,000 or so reentry vehicles coming in. So as I mentioned, the $2 billion, so we spent now, I think those first six or seven years eventually paid off in some areas and we got more focused after Desert Storm at looking at how we might apply these technologies to defend our, against missiles in the theater as well as against our nation. And I want to take one of those examples, one that I worked on in particular, to walk you through how we built that foundation and where we are going to head to, I think, here in the next few years. In the early to mid-age, in the 80s rather, the Army's Ballistic Missile Defense Command now I think is a strategic missile defense command, was looking at ways to apply hit-to-kill technology to destroy an incoming RV. And so they built an experimental set called the Homing Overlay Experiment in which they launched using essentially ICBM rocket motors a very large, about the size of a refrigerator, vehicle and an incoming RV and they had success. But we recognized that that would be a challenge for us in the future and so for things like the electromagnetic railgun, we were talking about launching projectiles of about a kilogram that were the size of a bread box. So we needed to significantly miniaturize that capability if we were going to get to realize that sort of capability in the future. And over time, I didn't get to a kilogram or the size of a bread box, but we did reduce the size of those projectiles down to about six kilograms or so and a little bit larger than a bread box. The electromagnetic railgun technology didn't come along very well in that same time frame, but we recognized that by applying these projectile technologies to some of our existing systems like, for example, the standard missile system in the Navy, we could change anti-aircraft missiles into ballistic missile defenders. And so this standard missile III that we have in the field today is essentially the grandson of that technology that we invented in the 80s and the early 90s. And the foundation for the systems that we have today are primarily based on that investment that we made in that time frame. So as we look at the system that General Todorov described here earlier today and look at what do we need to do in the future to make our ballistic missile defense systems more capable, I think there are two key areas that we want to focus our attention on. One is to reduce the number of shots that we take at each credible object. I'm not going to discuss in any depth here the sort of shot doctrine that our warfighter employs today in order to assure ourselves that we're going to reliably defend our nation. But needless to say that if he's going to have to shoot interceptors since we use hit-to-kill technology against credible objects, then it would be important for us to reduce the number of credible objects as well as the shots that we take against each credible object. And so that's where we're focusing our technology now in those particular areas. We want to find a way to reduce the number of shots that we take at each credible object. And we do that by several ways. One is we look at ways that we can improve the reliability of the interceptors we have today. And that's one of the bets we're making in this year's budget is looking at ways that we can do that for our ground base and mid-course defense system. We also look at the possibility of bringing more capability to each interceptor by adding more kill vehicles to each one of those interceptors. In other words, instead of taking several shots, being able to take one shot with several kill vehicles against that particular object, and then if you think about the probabilities of reliability, our effectiveness goes up in that way. Our system today, as you probably know, is beyond the missile warning message that we get from our overhead sensor systems in space, is primarily a terrestrial radar-based system. So all of the sensing that we do, the tracking of the missiles that come, are based on the ship-based sensors, the sea-based X-band radar, and our other terrestrial radars, including early warning radar, and what we call our TIPI-2, or our X-band radar that does discrimination. So all of that is what we base our decisions on in terms of how we launch our interceptors and on what path we launch our interceptors. For very long-range systems like the homeland defense system, where we expect an ICBM to travel a very long distance, you can imagine how challenging it would be to get a terrestrial radar all along the path of that ICBM, especially if you might envision a rate of ICBMs that would take different paths. And so the challenge of the Earth's curvature and these radar systems then brings us to the issue of how do we find a way to more reliably track from birth to death these incoming ballistic missiles. So our vision is to do a couple of things. One is to bring new phenomenology, in other words, gain more knowledge about what this system looks like, what the ballistic missile raid looks like by bringing additional sensors into this architecture. Not only radar systems, but systems that use electro-optical phenomenology in order to determine more about that system.  We want to get more knowledge about that system, and we want to understand it from birth to death so that we can discriminate and determine which are the two objects that we ought to be shooting at. And so getting a more capable discrimination system here now would be a way to improve the number of shots that we have to take or reduce the number of shots that we have to take by reducing the number of things that we might consider to be a credible object. So our vision here in the technology exploration now is to look at ways to bring electro-optical sensors into this architecture beyond that OPIR sensor, that missile warning sensor that kicks these things off. And we are going to do that by capitalizing on the work that is being done in industry today, both on sensors as well as on building unmanned aerial vehicles that fly at very high altitudes. A high altitude platform is also key to one of the other investments we want to make. And so if we go back just a few years here, we made a big bet on airborne lasers in the late 90s and early 2000s. And that system that we built, although it was very effective in doing that one particular job we had for it, which is proving that you could shoot down a rocket at the speed of light using light, a tremendous accomplishment, although it proved impractical from an operational standpoint. You can imagine having a fleet of 747s flying about 33,000 feet with a laser system in them. There is a lot of challenges to that. But what we know now from that is the next time we do this work, we are going to be looking at getting above the known atmosphere, where the aerosols won't affect the lasers, and at altitudes where the turbulence is significantly lower. So we want to find a regime that is high above the 33,000 feet. For all of us who fly on 747s on a regular basis here, we know that it can get pretty shaky at 33,000 feet almost any time of the year depending on where you are flying. So we want to make that more like 60,000 feet. Get to the stratosphere, where it will be a much calmer place for us to work. We are making investments in laser technology today that is both in our national laboratories and in our industry that goes beyond those chemical lasers that we looked at earlier to new solid-state electric lasers, which will be much more effective, efficient, effective as well, I believe, and ones that we can scale up and reduce the size of the laser necessary to get that job done. If we can find a way to make that happen, and we believe these technologies will lead us there, that we will be able to get those lasers on an unmanned aero platform at very high altitudes and make that case for the entire logistics and infrastructure which goes along with that much, much more simpler and make the technical challenges less daunting than they have been in the past. Mentioned earlier, it might have been during our discussion at lunch that there are other areas which we want to go back to, and so I am sort of going back to my past in this one. We left the rail gun in 1989 because there were challenges with getting a rail gun and the idea that we would build a new launch infrastructure that would get these 2,000 or 100-ton satellites in orbit with rail guns on them was not achievable. However, the services have been making investments in bringing that technology along primarily for close-end engagements and primarily for long-range fires, and so as they continue to develop that technology, we are looking at that as a possible way to get at some of our missile defense challenges, again having a magazine which is very, very cheap projectiles with the capability of electrically generating the power makes it possible for us to get away from this challenge that we find in terms of expensive interceptors against other rocket systems. Our goal ultimately is then to find a way to get more capable sensors into the architecture to improve the knowledge that we have from birth to death of this launch and to reduce the number of credible objects by understanding what objects are there. With the ultimate goal of reducing the objects dramatically by destroying the bucket booster in the boost phase, that will revolutionize the capability for missile defense and dramatically change the calculus of any of our adversaries. We are working today with industry, we are working with academia, and we are working in our national laboratories to make that vision come true. We are shifting our overall balance in our investments this year which had been primarily focused on increasing capacity over the last few years for our regional missile defense systems, and looking now at shifting the balance somewhat, ramping over the next couple of years to get at the advanced technology challenges that we are going to need to build that foundation for the missile defense architecture I just spoke of. We hope to have that here in the next decade based on those investments. We recognize that just like in the past, it will be a challenging endeavor and that we may not rush forward with continual success towards that goal, but we are excited about having you as partners and making that a true reality over the next 10 years. Thank you. Good afternoon, everybody. I'm Arch Macy and I'm now a private consultant. As many of you know, I had a background in some of this for a few years. If you don't like the ballistic missile defense review, you can blame me. I've heard it before, but go ahead. I was one of the co-authors. I'd like to talk about missile defense and thinking about next steps in missile defense from a somewhat different, perhaps, look at Rubik's Cube. This panel is about future directions. It sort of was titled. And so the question I'm thinking about is what are the future elements of missile defense that need to be developed, melded with each other, and demonstrated and may known to potential antagonists? Let me develop that for a moment. We've talked today a lot about intercept activities. There's been some comment on left of launch. So I'll phrase the question this way. What is the right of launch activities and plans other than that of intercept? My basic premise is that the missile defense system that is generated by MDA and the services does not and cannot provide the overall defense of the nation against ballistic missile threats. We acknowledge for the moment that a massive attack from China or Russia, the only response is in kind, and that has long been our explicit policy and will not change unless there is some breakthrough in physics, which no one expects. But let's see everything else. We've talked earlier about defending against ballistic missiles cannot be an inventory challenge. You're always going to lose. There's always going to be more interceptors, excuse me, more threats than are interceptors. So at some point, in addition, the laws of physics, the laws of probability and statistics say that even as you are taking on incoming threats, some are going to get through. No system is 100 percent. I'm an aerospace engineer by trade and by experience, and you hate to admit that, but you know you can't build a perfect system. So there's no way I can assure somebody that I can get them all, even if I did have the inventory. So why do we have a BMDS? Well, obviously, destruction of the threat is a part of what you need to do. What the BMDS capability does is to provide the protection of critical assets long enough that the National Command Authority, the President and our leadership, can take steps to end the threat by other means, get them to stop launching. If they don't launch it's not a threat. As Rich pointed out, if we can get them on launch, that's great. At some point there, I would submit that particularly in short and intermediate range scenarios, you're going to run out of boost phase interceptors or whatever your technique may be, and boost phase to me can include directed energy, light, railgun, agnostic as to the technique. So the question is what does this thing need to do? The ballistic missile defense system, that capability produced by MDA and the services, has to buy time and it forwards time to the leadership to take other actions and to make decisions. And they're going to have to happen in pretty short order. It gives the NCA the chance to choose other methods, all of the elements of national power, the classic four that you learn in war college, diplomatic, information, military, and economic, and using all of them in whatever way is appropriate to get the threat to cease to occur. The strategic necessity is to protect the homeland, our own forces, friends, and allies from ballistic missile attack. So the key word there is it's about protection. It's not about just flight destruction. So ballistic missile protection planning must encompass a continuum of capabilities, plans, lines of authority and communications, and training to negate or interrupt the ballistic missile threat sequence from its threat planning to preparation to targeting to launch to subsequent launches. So I submit that perhaps an idea for future discussion is that what we need is a ballistic missile protection plan of which the ballistic missile defense system is an element. This to achieve and maintain a comprehensive all of government approach to negate potential or actual ballistic missile threats. Today we've been talking a lot about systems. We started off with the SDI concept of ways to protect us from the missiles, to protect us from the warheads. That's a kinetic approach to people like me in the Department of Defense. That's where we tend to go to. We grew up that way. They said I'm an aerospace engineer, and so I think like that. So since the advent of even the SDI concept has been focused, we've been focused on developing and fielding the capability to perform threat negation by intercept or destruction in flight. So, but we know that we can't keep doing that because we'll lose the inventory game. It's clear that MDA owns the intercept part of ballistic missile protection. Who owns the rest? Do they know that they do? Do others know who owns what? And then the question is what is the rest? What are the methods, the techniques by which you're going to get an antagonist to stop launching? Now it can range from the absolutely terrifying to perhaps something less. I'll go back to that in a bit, but that range of actions needs to be thought about and understood, developed to prevent launch in the first place or to prevent subsequent launches, and melded with each other to provide an effective and understood comprehensive protection. We have to do this ahead of time. The longest flight time of a ballistic missile is the ICBM range at something around 40 minutes. So assuming that it's a one after the other, the best time you have is 40 minutes. It is probable, depending on what you think the inventories of limited number launches may be, that the ballistic missile defense system could provide protection to a certain level for hours to maybe a day or two. That's how long you have in order to accomplish another effect to end the launches. So they said what capabilities need to be developed to prevent the launch, to prevent subsequent launches. Something that will have to be considered at some point is who is responsible for the attribution that can be made public to explain what you're doing in an unchallengeable manner? Who knows where it came from? Well, we know where it came from within the BMDS and the overhead sensor systems. We usually tend to be loathed to put too much accuracy into our reports on that. But in the case where you're going to take action now, at some level you're going to have to convince the world as well as your antagonists that in fact they are the ones doing it. And you know where it's coming from and you can prove it. So we need a comprehensive basis for BMD protection. It can't be intercept alone. The overarching goal, as I said, has to be to deter or prevent launch in the first place and if the launch occurs to inflict sufficient pressure to end further launches and do so in a timely manner. We need to determine what constitutes effective deterrence to dissuade an antagonist from launching based on two principles that a potential antagonist must be led to understand. First, the attack will not succeed in its objective and that the penalty for the attempt will be too high to be borne. This is not a new concept, it's the basic statement of any deterrent strategy. The challenge for our discussion is what are the steps, the factors, the plans and capabilities necessary to accomplish these two principles in defending against ballistic missiles. The first principle is addressed in prime by the ballistic missile defense system, the intercept destruction capability. The second has to be addressed by a variety of means depending on the situation. BMD planning, I believe, will have to account for different categories of attack. I put them into four sectors or judgment, existential, a violent statement, a rogue or an accident. An existential attack, which against the United States would at this time be provided only by China or Russia, we have a declaratory policy on how we will respond. We have been clear on that for many, many years. That is not a function of BMD protection, per se. A violent statement by an antagonistic state, a number of missiles, a limited attack, a rogue and attack of a limited number of missiles are two different conditions. The rogue issue being who do you pressure? If it's a violent state, if it's an act of State X, then you can pressure State X. You can figure out how to do that, one would hope. If it's a rogue attack and I would pick ISIS as a classic, how and where do you pressure? If ISIS gets its hands on MRBMs and uses them against Europe, what is the pressure point? What can we do about that? In some cases, the answer may be no, which will then affect your response. I will get back to that. Then you have the accidental one. Then how is that communicated? If an accidental launch occurs, how does the owner of the missile prior to launch tell you, I am very sorry and it wasn't me and it won't happen again, and he may be right or he may be faking it. If anyone remembers the somewhat terrifying novel Seven Days in May and what the President had to agree to do at the end of it to end the thermonuclear war, that's a very hard decision. Then how do these questions differ between Homeland Defense and Regional?  It may be appropriate. It may not be, because then you run into issues of escalatory response. So we need to consider and pre-plan our responses to these other types of attack. As I said, and I think I bring it up again, there is a limited timeline here. When this happens, we can't then summon the First National Security Council meeting about it. Going back to what I mentioned about all of the government, whole of government part, is that the Defense Department tends to be very, very good at planning. They do branches and sequels, they do con plans and O plans and all that kind of thing. The government as a whole does not, but you are going to have to have an interleaved way of economic pressure, political pressure, diplomatic pressure, steps that you are going to take, and they have got to work together to be maximum, maximally effective. As I said, one of the differences between ballistic missiles and other kinetic threats, particularly for the homeland, is the time span from first action to warhead arrival is shorter than other threats. Cruise missiles, bombers, sea and land forces all are viewable in hours to days before arrival. You can take steps to crank things up, but once the first launch has occurred, inbound is in less than 40 minutes. So we have to have a method of response that starts to apply effective pressure in hours to a very few number of days. The capabilities and actions across the spectrum of necessary responses and responders must be prepared, equipped, and trained before the threat situation develops to the point of requiring action. Putting together all the elements, the dime elements, the plan will need to consider particularly in the area of regional defense, the interaction with allies and partners, and how their actions, decisions, capabilities might play in our assistance of their defense, or how it may limit our ability, depending on what choices they have to make. NATO, for instance, has a very detailed BNB plan for the intercept element of missile defense protection of NATO, territory, and Europe. What are other elements that the NATO alliance can bring to bear against an antagonist? They are a military alliance, after all. They are not the EU. What sort of connections and relations with the EU, the economic deciders of Europe, need to be engendered in order to come up with an effective response? In the interleaving of these capabilities, do they fall under the NATO command structure or some other entity? The EU, Council of Governments, unclear. Earlier, we were talking about exchanging information. Frank mentioned that. How do you coordinate this with other allies and partners? Some of this can be very sensitive, but again, some of it needs to be planned and thought of ahead of time. Do we need to extend the concept of the phased adaptive approach to the whole of ballistic missile protection and not just intercept capability? Having asked all those questions and posited a challenge, I have a recommendation. I warned Elaine about this before she had to leave. She smiled. I recommend that we extend the BMDR, the Ballistic Missile Defense Review, not as a revisit but as an extension, to encompass the whole of government approach, to allocate responsibilities and tasks, and to find the deterrent points that need to be made and demonstrated to all who might consider threatening our homeland, forces, allies, and partners. In other words, to provide a ballistic missile protection plan. There have been and are still ongoing studies and plans addressing different elements of providing protection, including non-kinetic, non-military. But I think it is time now to bring those disparate ideas and analysis together. And again, as happened in the 2010 BMDR, to use a cross-government interagency consultative approach, and it really was, and I had the pleasure of taking part in it, much more so than I had experienced in any other time in the government, to interleave the knowledge and capabilities of this requisite approach. I do submit that the original premises and results of the 2010 BMDR remain valid. However, I believe it is time now to extend its scope and direction to the whole of ballistic missile protection. With that, I will close and look forward to your questions. Thanks. Thank you, gentlemen. I think this was very thought-provoking. I think I will start off with a question for Mr. Matlock. You laid out, and in the news, really the past week, there's been a lot of discussion of R&D and that sort of thing for MDA. But you laid out several key technologies. You talked about space for both sensing and other things.  First of all, I was hoping you might address what has been the fruit of these past investments. Number one, speak to that. Has this just been experiments that we yielded nothing from or what kinds of things have they given us now that makes the future possible? And then, frankly, also, given the relative reduction of MDA's budget for R&D, how are we going to be able to do with current budget levels or during the lower budget levels, do these more impressive types of capabilities? I think that what you see in our, as I mentioned a little bit earlier here, what you see in our system today is essentially the results of the technology investments that we made in the 80s and the 90s. And so much of the interceptor systems, the command and control system, the sensor network, all of those things are a result of investments that we made broadly in that timeframe. Elaine likes to use the seed corn analogy here. And so we ate a lot of our seed corn to get that. And in order to respond to the capacity, the requirement for greater capacity across the regions, we've had to transition that technology and make those investments. And so whenever you're faced with the sort of fiscal realities that we face today in terms of that balance of capacity versus capability and the need to look across government for how do we do that in sequestration, then tends to focus the mind a bit more on those things which are having the most promise and perhaps leave those the remainder to future investigations. So that road map that I laid out for you earlier here, Tom, is based on some hard thinking and some hard choices that we made within the agency as well as with our partners in the warfighting community and in the acquisition community and with policy. So we think that we've got a road map now that is going to get us on a path to make those improvements and enhancements in the missile defense capability over the next few years. I take Arch's point in terms of we probably need to go beyond just that right of launch look and so we'll be looking probably with greater consideration this year at how we start to broaden beyond that. Great. Well, let me I think turn to you, Admiral Macy, I really like your extend the VMBR approach. It kind of reminds me, frankly, I think it was the 2002 national strategy for countering WMD, which had those several pillars or what have you and I don't think that was updated. There has been update, although, of course, our national strategy has been been updated since then, which dealt with consequence management response and all that sort of thing. This seems to be really the this is where the rubber meets the road in terms of really maturing how we think about missile defense. How far along, just so we have some clarity about in terms of thinking and acting merely in terms of that missile sponge that Ketcher's made, does it work, how far along are we right now to integrating those missile defense capabilities and plans to everything else? We've heard all day in a way how this is just one piece of our larger national and I think the BMD ballistic missile protection plan that you articulate is a further step, but how far along are we there? I don't think we're very far along, which is why I posited the idea. That stuff's been talked about many times, how you put it's a classic problem of how you put whole of government approaches together. It's always hard to do. I try to argue that in the case of responding to ballistic missile defense events, the ballistic missile events, the timeline is much shorter than almost any other event occurrence factor when you have more than one launch. So you don't have days or weeks or months, much less to say, okay, this is how I'm going to respond. The other end of it was a of such a thing would be the classic force on force event that occurred in Desert Storm and we took, we had the luxury of months to prepare our response. You're not going to have that here. So therefore you have to build your capability, exercise your capability, train the people in it much further ahead of time and maintain that level of training, that level of capability. My observation is we really don't have that because this will encompass actions that and certainly the Department of Defense will take, which is what General Todorov and others are responding, rich are responsible to do, but and North Com, NORAD, SENT Com, Paycom is appropriate, but it's also going to involve actions that the State Department are going to have to take, Justice Department, Treasury, Commerce, because you're going to need to apply pressure in a number of different ways in order to change the behavior of your antagonist and I don't believe that we are very far along at doing that now. If we had to do it tomorrow it would be a significant pickup game. Excellent. So we go to the audience questions, especially on the technology and the you might say the full spectrum responses, I guess right here. Good afternoon, Charles Newstead State Department speaking just for myself as a physicist and not for the department where Mr. Carey will fire me. I'll be always doing a great job. Two points. In terms of the technology, Mr. Matlock talked about the various systems that we could have either on terrestrially or in space and as he pointed out developing a capability in the satellites to shoot things down would be certainly better if we could do it. Now in particular laser interests me because those are coming along very quickly. One, not quite there yet, we don't have a laser that would we can direct and quickly take out an incoming attack but the point is that you mentioned dialed pumped south state lasers which are coming along very quickly now and maybe what we need now we've got to be concerned that this capability is being developed in a number of countries. The United States is doing it and so is are the French for their stockpiled stewardship programs as you understand but that doesn't have the strength that we need to knock out a missile so the point. What's the question? Sorry, I get to the question. The question is this because China and Russia are both Russia at Sarov and China in their defense establishment are developing what they call Russia the sign is called divine light and what the Russians call I forgot the name but at least they're supposed to be even stronger than what we had with NIF and laser mega-jewel so if the well I'm sorry I'll get to the point it's a long road I'm trying to travel here. The main point is how do we defend against the Chinese and the Russians because they may well have the capability of developing these lasers before we do since they can seem at this point. Other people doing direct energy as well you want to speak to that we're developing the systems but they can other folks are developing direction energy as well any comment on that? Well I hope we're gonna hope we're moving more quickly no I so I don't mean to be flippant but I think what we see here in the in the last last five or six years is we were very successful in the airborne laser in terms of proving the physics and proving that we could generate the power necessary to shoot down shoot down rockets. Our big challenge there was that it was operationally impractical because of the nature of the of the system so we're looking at the technologies that the gentlemen suggested there the diode pumped alkali laser system which is primarily focused at our our national laboratory in in California. We're also looking at another concept the fiber combined laser along with our DARPA and and Air Force teammates and looking at at scaling those up and so we're finding that the technology is moving along fairly quickly. We won't be at at lethal capability here for some years to come but we're hopeful that we'll be able to focus that research here along with bringing our industry into the in the picture very shortly to help us understand how we might transition that technology then to an effective missile defense system that could perform a number of missile defense functions. Do you want to talk about the FY16 UAV proposal the proposal for a laser mount on UAV that was yeah so we have we've asked we've seen in the last couple of years as I've mentioned a great great improvements in these two laser systems. We also know that that our partners at ONR have been demonstrating lasers on on ships for for a particular mission and the army has done some great work down at White Sands missile range for for counter martyrs with lasers and so we want to take the the research that we've got in the laboratory as well as the research that's going on today in our in our industry and look at the possibility of whether or not we can transition more quickly to a to an airborne laser demonstrator here over the next four years and so we've made made some bets in our budget and will be awarding contracts shortly with industry to look at what that inner what that excuse me what that laser demonstrator might look like and how we might be able to put it together and on what timeline. Great other folks Mike. Hi Mike Gruse with Space News I was wondering if you could uh this question is from Mr. Matlock if you could elaborate a little bit more about the sensor network and what you might gain from that and uh what kind of timeline there might be for that. Which sensor network? I'm sorry there was talk earlier about I guess uh space space right space based sensor network that might be a little more elaborate than I guess what currently exists. So what we're what we're doing right now is looking at space for under in the current fiscal environments access to space for for our research has been challenging and so what we've been looking at is uh other uh other modalities that we can use then to demonstrate the technology but ultimately we might want to put on uh put in space and so uh we have right now a program that we're working to uh to modify some of our unmanned aerial vehicles with this uh with this new sensor capability and looking at doing that in the field we had some success just this past uh fall at the Pacific Missile Range Facility in conjunction with some of our Aegis Oblistic Missile Defense tests in which we uh we took a uh a EOIR sensor that's being used in the field today for uh for other purposes mounted on the front of a Reaper unmanned aerial vehicle and move the capability uh forward so that we could track missiles uh up in the atmosphere as opposed to look at targets on the ground and uh with uh with a stereo tracking capability with those uh Reapers we found that we could generate the kind of track quality necessary to launch standard missiles against targets targets that were launched uh there at PMRF we have a uh a tech plan now to look at increasing that capability over the next few years with the primary goal of looking at the sensor capability as opposed to the platform and then making a decision down the road depending on the success of that sensor whether or not this is something we would consider deploying in space uh or whether it's something that makes sense to deploy a terrestrial unmanned aircraft sir hi Scott Masioni from inside the Pentagon I just wanted to go back to the airborne laser on the drones um how do you reconcile that with uh that it will be attacking the missiles in the booster phase and it'll take a while we'll have to be an enemy airspace deal with enemy fire and the lasers probably won't be powerful enough to destroy uh you know the missile instantaneously I'm sorry what was the question I didn't catch the last part of that how can you the the laser won't be able to destroy instantaneously the the missile when it's in the boost phase you know it would at least take a little while until the the missile is destroyed so you know how are you going to protect these drones uh in an enemy environment while they're shooting down a boost phase missile so I'm going to leave that that con up's questioned up to my partners in the air force but but what my my job here and what my goal is is to prove that we can make the the technology work uh at extended ranges uh so uh you know our goal would be rather than tens or hundreds of kilometers to get much longer range of capability out of these lasers so that's uh why I'm driving at these more efficient electric lasers to be able to scale them up to uh to greater power uh and so that we can laze at longer ranges and get more more energy on target which would reduce the time that you've just talked about that we'd have to spend lazing each target so the goal from a technology standpoint is to is to get a more efficient laser that's more powerful at longer range over time and we're of course uh one of the the challenges we're looking at here with this laser demonstrator is then taking it to the field and working with our warfighter compadres on uh on what would be a reasonable con up says we look at missile defense missions that use directed energy well I have another question actually for for Admiral Macy uh did you talk about uh integrating these things and frankly thinking about integrating them uh more heavily ultimately to buy time uh for these what what's the role of we're working with our allies on that to what extent I mean the QDR talks about uh you know one of the the pillars being working with uh our partners and and allies um on the missile defense mission how reliant or is the United States going to be on our own capabilities and how much are are working in in integrating with becoming interoperable with other folks in the Middle East Asia Pacific uh and NATO what I think it's um vision there it's a continual effort it's to uh get more and more reliant and more and more capable of working together I mean NATO has has done this already uh the decision was taken to make ballistic missile defense a mission of NATO and then further that the the ballistic missile defense plans the rules of engagement the defended asset list and everything were agreed upon at 28 and NATO uh which is as complete as you're going to get and that by force means that some areas get more protection than others but they all agreed to it um so you work with your allies and partners for a number of reasons one is particularly in the cases where you have treaties you have a responsibility to them I mean NATO is probably the most classic and the fullest one of article five we're an attack on one is an attack on all so we are fully reliant on our systems one is by definition and then you are reliant on other people's systems to the greatest degree that they can provide them and you can agree to them with it there is certainly a matter of trust you want your allies involved not only because you have a responsibility to them as they do to you for joint defense and for cooperative defense but for whatever assets they can bring to the table whatever capabilities not just military but economic and whatever um a completely off the wall but not necessarily idea is have part of the declared response policy that if a launch comes from a nation that the other nations the other economic power nations which would be the United States and Europe and uh Japan Australia so forth would immediately shut down all banking transactions I mean that that would render any modern country essentially inoperable in something on the order 24 hours because the world is so interconnected on banking so if that becomes part of what you would do that would be part of a cooperative agreement where allies and partners could join in with providing this effect good what the folks world mix it up a little bit let's let's mix actually I you know earlier you asked about the laser technology I'd like to to go back and frankly this is for both of you this was referred to earlier today the the greeners and odierno memo about reassessing our strategy I think you've spoken to that to some extent I'd like to comment on I'm giving you the opportunity to comment on that comment on the memo it said a couple things it talked about budget constraints it talked about really the increasing stress on the services for the missile defense mission and we heard earlier about of course the frustration that affects everything it affects nor the command and homeland defense and it affects others so go at it the reason that I'm personally convinced that that memo is written by the two primary providers of BMD capability among the services was that those two officers were fulfilling their professional and legal obligation when you are a commissioned officer in command you are responsible to keep your superiors advised on your ability or lack thereof to perform an assigned mission it doesn't matter whether you like the mission or not I didn't read that memo was saying that the BMD policy was wrong I read the memo as the chief staff of the army and the chief of naval operations were telling the secretary defense sir I don't think I can do what you want me to do so something's got to change the mission or the resources but they were doing what one has to do in that position in fact they would have been seriously at fault had they not done so very good very good I'm going to keep going I'd like to kick back to the MKV multi-volume kill and now the MOKV multiple object what's the what's the real potential the long-term potential for miniaturization of the kill vehicles whether it's on today's interceptors or whether it's on something else what's the it's the long-term potential for miniaturization there well we've been through through several cycles of miniaturization and and let me kind of give you a feel for where we're at I mentioned earlier that we had taken this refrigerator size the kill vehicle and shrunk it down to the size of a breadbox and that that was primarily what got us the capability to turn the standard missile from the navy parlance into a ballistic missile defender and that that system is probably about the right size for what we need to get done the last time we looked at the MKV program our goal then was to look at a very large number of interceptors on a on a single booster we were talking in the order of 24 25 as we improve our sensing network and improve our capabilities discriminate the need to have 25 25 kill vehicles on a single rocket is certainly less necessary than what we would have perceived before and we weren't striving for that that kind of we don't need to strive for that capability now so my perception is is that that we will probably need some miniaturization this nooks go around I don't think it's the two orders of magnitude that we achieved from from the hoe experiment to the elite projectile but there's some work that we need to do there I think as we look at our RKV and the way we formulated the the new I'm sorry I'm speaking in acronyms but the new kill vehicle improved reliability as we're looking at modular open system architecture there that would allow us to bring new systems in to broaden the vendor space as well for our for our contractors so that in other words if you can design to this particular interface and have this set of meet the set of requirements then you're a you're a new vendor for the missile defense integrator that will allow us to bring more more to bear on that on that challenge and so I think it's a combination of how do we how do we bring a little bit more capability perhaps a little bit more miniaturization but I don't perceive it as going from from one to 26 I perceive this probably going from one to some number much less than 26 in this next go around we're will probably making be making investments this coming year looking at how do we go from an RKV to and to a MOKV a multi object kill vehicle and we'll be looking at at our industry partners to help us help us decide what that what that what's required to make that leap good any other comments from from either you folks or anybody else twitter like for example you're going to Poland hi you're going to Poland right who measures what because I'm looking at it from the host nation standpoint and who sells that or are you guys just RND or the environmental assessment I think I think the general are mainly speaking to future directions more than the political considerations for hosting and that kind of thing yeah any final thoughts things that haven't been been brought out you want to get off no I think it's been a very interesting conference my only encouragement would be again from my obviously demonstrated somewhat parochial viewpoint is is that we continue to look at the fact that we have to do more than provide a kinetic answer to an inbound threat hearing a lot hearing a lot about that and I think there's a lot of nodding heads on that well I think I think we've reached our our conclusion I want to thank both of you gentlemen for this I also absolutely want to thank our sponsor the Boeing company for making this possible for making larger work on missile defense possible and we'll hopefully be have continuing this conversation in the coming month so thank you all for coming out


Hi, my name is Monty Johnson. I teach philosophy at the University of California, San Diego. And this is the first of my lectures on Albert Camus, The Plague, La Peste, 1947. I'm using the translation of Stuart Gilbert, published in 1948. Now, to begin with, the overall structure of the work, it consists of five parts, which are of various lengths, and these parts are divided into chapters. Part one, which is an average-sized part, eight chapters, 63 pages in translation, explains that the book is a narrated chronicle of events that take place from mid-April to mid-February, sometime in the 1940s, of a plague that affected a French colony called Oran in North Africa. Initially, the citizens deny that this is happening, but that gives way to steadily growing unease and eventually panic. Plague, although its effects have already spread far and wide, is not officially declared and accepted by everyone until the very last line of this first part. The second part, by far the longest part, consisting of chapters 9 to 17, 97 pages, gives us the introductions to the characters and in-depth character descriptions of Ryo, the doctor who's leading the medical response, his friend Taro, who's a traveler who keeps a journal that the narrator uses in recounting the events, Rambar, a kind of hack journalist who just happens to be trapped in Oran because he was visiting there and who spends almost the entire novel trying to escape from it. Grand, an unassuming bureaucrat who proves himself constantly useful during the emergency, and Father Pantelou, a Jesuit priest and intellectual who at first treats the plague very abstractly and sermonizes about it as a punishment for religious indifference on the part of Oran's citizens. So, chapter 2 introduces all of those characters in their complexity by describing their initial reactions to the plague and the rapidly changing circumstances in the town. Then in part 3, which is a kind of pedestal of the whole work, center of the work, but the simplest and briefest part, the entire part just consists of one chapter that's 18 pages long, contains a graphic description of the treatment of mass death as a result of the plague in Oran. Part 4, quite substantial, 76 pages, chapters 19-25, is a collection of self revelations and descriptions of changes or transformations that the main characters undergo. Their perceptions of themselves, of their friends, of strangers, and of the world itself, including nature, are revealed and reflected and changed in various ways as a result of the plague. And part 5, the last 39 pages in translation, chapters 26-29, we get an end of the plague and resolution of the novel, a review of the main characters. Some of them have died, others have been profoundly changed but have lived, and others still remain essentially unchanged. So to begin with part 1, and the opening. The time is spring, April 16th to be specific, of some unspecified year in the 1940s. The narrator tells of unusual or extraordinary events in what he describes as a very usual or ordinary. He complains of how plain it is, a town called Oran, which is in Algeria, North Africa, on the southern coast of the Mediterranean. He describes the ordinariness of the town in great detail, but basically with respect to three kinds of themes. Number one, work. He describes them as a completely mercantilist and commercial and business-oriented people who are mostly focused on making money and absorbed with making money to the exclusion of almost everything else. He describes their attitudes about love, which he describes as basically thoughtless, either kind of young lust or bored, domesticated relationships, and then their approach to death, which seems to be even more thoughtless because it's just not in their view at all. They're too caught up with business. They have a perfunctory observation, even of its existence. Now, at this point, the calm and tranquility of the town corresponds to a lack of real feeling and kind of emotional detachment of the citizens due to their largely commercial preoccupations with money and businesses. And so we are to get a sense of a normal but uninspiring and unpassionate place. The narrator says that to some people, these events will seem quite natural to others all but incredible. And so that depends, apparently, on the reader and their situation. As for the narrator himself, the work is said to be a chronicle and a narrative, both, although it's not a strict chronicle. Some of the later chapters describe events that occur earlier than other chapters. And it is essentially a narrative, but a composite and often unlinear narrative that's been constructed afterwards out of the notes of several different people. In fact, it's not immediately clear who the narrator is. He doesn't reveal himself at the beginning, but says his identity will be made known in due course. Now, Oran in Algeria happens to have actually been the birthplace of Albert Campbell, and he lived there. But he is not a character in the work, and it would be facile to read any one of the characters as corresponding to his own views. The narrator claims that they are merely playing the part of an historian, and thus relying on hard data, of which he describes three kinds. His own view of things or autopsies, as it were, since the narrator turns out to be a surgeon. Second, other eyewitness accounts that are known to him through talking with some of the central people involved in the town and the plague. And third, documents that subsequently came into his hands, by which he seems to mean primarily the notes of his friend Taro, who was keeping a journal and describes many things in details, that it turns out the narrator comes into possession of because he dies of the plague towards the end. Now, the characters, over the next several slides I will introduce the characters. The first, perhaps most important, is the Doctor Rio, Doctor Bernard Rio, a practicing surgeon who's at the center of all the action. The narration begins when he sees a dead rat, and in the end is revealed that he is the narrator, and he introduces and concludes the entire work. His wife is set off on a train in the very beginning of the whole novel, going out of town to a mountain sanitarium for treatment for an unnamed serious illness. And Rio is remiss at her departure, but they pledge to each other to make a fresh start when she returns. In her place, Rio's mother has showed up to live with him while his wife is away. And we also learn of his friend Jean Taro in his young, idealistic friend, who's also a writer, keeping a kind of plague diary or journal of his travels or wanderings. That is, we learn consulted by Rio in constructing the overall narration of the novel. Now, the journalist Rambert, a major character, he's a former football player, turned journalist, kind of hack journalist from Paris, who's on assignment in Iran to report on conditions with local Arab population. And he is going to interview Rio about this. Rio explains to him that the conditions aren't good, but he hesitates to cooperate with Rambert because of doubts he has about Rambert's commitment to telling the uncompromised truth when it becomes clear that Rambert would not or could not do so and is not, in fact, an idealistic or courageous journalist. Rambert responds by comparing Rio to Saint-Just, a very problematic Jacobin leader of the reign of terror during the French Revolution. Rio ignores this comparison but describes himself in an important passage as sick and tired of the world that he lived in, though he has much liking for his fellow men, and he is the kind of person who had resolved to have no truck with injustice and compromises with the truth. So, his relationship with Rambert begins with tension and there's kind of tension throughout, but in part that's because one is very committed to the truth and to intellectual virtues, while the other is mostly motivated by his desires and emotions and is slow to use his reason to examine what he should do in the situation. Several other central characters include the priest, the bureaucrat and the criminal, the priest Father Pantelou, a learned and militant Jesuit who was highly thought of in the town, even in circles who were quite indifferent to religion. He's a serious man who gives two key sermons in the novel in the first one about how the plague is a punishment for sins, but then as he sees the innocent suffer due to it as well, his religious convictions are challenged. Joseph Grand, very interesting character, a clerk and a patient of Dr. Rios. He's also an aspiring writer who asks Rio to come to his building where he's just saved his neighbor who tried to hang himself. Grand is an enigmatic figure who has resigned himself to the life of a petty cleric and his austerity or asceticism protects him from anxiety so that he's able to maintain his tranquility even though he's eventually put in charge of keeping track of the mortality figures due to the plague which steadily rise. Now the person who he's just saved from hanging himself is his neighbor, Cotard, but Cotard doesn't even want the doctor to be brought in because he fears having to notify the police. Cotard begs Grand not to notify anyone. Rio agrees to ask the police to put off an inquiry into him and we later learn that the cause of Cotard's reluctance is the fact that he's a criminal fugitive who's hiding in Oran and was on the brink of suicide in order to escape his fear of punishment. Now most of part one is just a description of the growing uneasiness due to the plague as people initially deny and then slowly are forced to accept the reality of what's happening. It begins on April 16th when a porter becomes afflicted and has a terrible illness and a very brief remission from this illness. It's described in some detail before he has a crisis and then dies raving in the end about the rats whose existence in the very beginning of the novel he denies exist. So the affliction of this person known directly to Rio begins the entire set of tragic events, denial of the reality or existence of the very cause of the plague. Rio rings up the sanitary services, Mercier the man who's in charge of that department promises to get an order to deal with the problem, but evidently doesn't bother to actually follow through. So the bureaucracy kind of fails in its response. On April 18th, the evening papers are questioning whether the municipality has acted on the rat problem turns out that it had not. And so a meeting is later scheduled and a meeting in order to ends up issuing an order to get the sanitary services to finally act, but it describes a kind of plotting and bumbling response. Things thus worsen over the next several days with respect to the dead and dying rats to the point where people are literally stepping around and on them. So what they had initially considered stupid or obnoxious and didn't even want to talk about they begin to see as vaguely menacing. By April 28th panic sets in authorities are accused of slackness. Some people flee the town to their coastal summer homes, even though it's early in the season. And then it's announced that only a few rats were found so everybody breathes freely and thinks the problem is over. And to this point that we hear about Rio's ruminations over what's going on. In chapter five, we get a description of his personal thoughts about the possibility that the rats actually and the fleas indicate that there's a problem with plague once he starts to see these this unexplained illness.  And so they went on doing their business, arranged for journeys, formed views. How should they have given a thought to anything like the plague, which rules out any future cancels journeys, silences, the exchange of views, they fancy themselves free, and no one would ever be free so long as there are pestilences. So the first thing, one of the first reactions is this is affecting my freedom I reject that imposition on my freedom so I won't cooperate with not only the laws put in place to deal with it, but even the claim and the reality acknowledging the reality that it's happening. And Rio reflects on history and the horrible death toll due to plagues, such as those at Athens, which is described by Lucretius, who is explicitly mentioned on page 40. Plagues in China and Constantinople, Venice, London and so forth. But he says it's impossible to fathom how many deaths happen. And nobody takes these accounts seriously, even the historians that are interested in researching them have no direct acquaintance with the reality of plague. So at this point, there still seems to be hope that the plague can be stopped. And Rio just cannot imagine how it could affect such an unremarkable town. And so late in this part, he's still thinking that the plague might might not actually make much headway among the citizens, as he says. Now, this leads to a strange phenomenon, which is the kind of irrational denial of the plain facts of the situation. So beginning with Michel, the concierge of the building in which Rio lived, initially he denied there were dead rats, then he tried to blame them on kids or pranks. Then he develops symptoms of the plague but denies that they're anything serious. And as a result, he's the first one to die of the plague. Now, Rio also has an asthmatic Spanish patient who reveals that there's a lot of chatter in his poor neighborhood about dead rats. He's more realistic about the problem, but he never acts. He's just a patient, not an agent. He observes the events that are happening, but does nothing and can do nothing to change them. Othon, a police magistrate in a chance encounter with Rio, says, oh, the rats, that's nothing.  Later, his wife is quarantined due to the plague, but he refuses to stop taking his children out to public restaurants and so forth. And in the end, he is forced to, in a very vivid way to acknowledge finally the existence of the plague. Now, after consulting with colleagues and learning of about 20 deaths, Rio encourages the local medical board to put fresh cases into isolation wards. But the board says that only the prefect can do that, and so it fails to act. The prefect, in turn, tells another doctor to take prompt action if you like, but don't attract much attention. He personally convinced it's a false alarm, and so there is still dithering over the response to the plague among most of the officials. Another doctor, a colleague of Rio named Castel, tells Rio that he is convinced that the fever is plague. He'd actually witnessed it firsthand a long time ago in China, and even just 20 years ago he says in Paris. And he points out that people will insist that the plague has disappeared and refuse to accept the possibility that it can afflict them. This seems to be one of the symptoms of the plague is that people deny its reality. Everyone knows that pestilences have a way of recurring in the world, yet somehow we find it hard to believe in the ones that crash down on our heads from a blue sky. There have been as many plagues as wars in history, yet always plagues and wars take people equally by surprise, Kamu writes. So it's the fact that we should have been able to predict. We knew it was coming. Officials warned us about it. Historians teach us about it. They describe it in vivid detail. Everybody knows it's real, knows it can happen. But whenever it does, somehow the human reaction is to deny its reality and to let it become a crisis such that characters are tested and lives that manage to survive it are changed forever. So by the end of part one, we finally have an acceptance of the reality of the situation. Even when the doctors meet there at first reluctant to accept the facts and even the willingness to call it the plague because it's clear that that would imply the need for very drastic action. And initially they embrace a kind of wait and see attitude. They entertain the idea that the epidemic could just stop spontaneously. But Rio insists that whether it's called plague or not, they must immediately enact severe prophylactic measures. The media doesn't however take the story up very quickly because it's a kind of invisible thing unlike the rats which were in your face. The invisible bullets of the plague aren't initially as newsworthy. Official notices posted around town don't have much effect. One had the feeling that many concessions had been made to a desire not to alarm the public, i.e. for the sake of political expediency. Even the doctor is mentally affected by the plague. On two occasions he enters crowded cafes like Cardard.   It quickly becomes clear that the measures that the officials have taken prove totally inadequate and the only hope is for a spontaneous disappearance or natural death of the disease itself. And so isolation wards quickly fill up. New measures have to be taken even with regard to burials. Doctors await the arrival of a new serum to combat the disease from a lab outside the city, but it will take a long time to synthesize to create any kind of medicine like a vaccine or serum that could avoid or inoculate or even cure the plague is just a distant hope. Eventually, the prefect is forced to act and to enact real quarantine measures. So part one ends with instructions coming from colonial administrators quote, proclaim a state of plague and close the town. By the time we read those words, this actually seems to be a kind of relief, almost like good news. As if reason is triumphing over the ignorance and incompetence so frustratingly depicted throughout this first section as we see the bungled responses to this crisis.