text:
Apuleius

Apuleius (also called Lucius Apuleius Madaurensis; c. 124 – after 170 ) was a Numidian Latin-language prose writer, Platonist philosopher and rhetorician. He was born in the Roman province of Numidia, in the Berber city of Madauros, modern-day M'Daourouch, Algeria. He studied Platonism in Athens, travelled to Italy, Asia Minor, and Egypt, and was an initiate in several cults or mysteries. The most famous incident in his life was when he was accused of using magic to gain the attentions (and fortune) of a wealthy widow. He declaimed and then distributed his own defense before the proconsul and a court of magistrates convened in Sabratha, near Oea (modern Tripoli, Libya). This is known as the Apologia.

His most famous work is his bawdy picaresque novel the Metamorphoses, otherwise known as The Golden Ass. It is the only Latin novel that has survived in its entirety. It relates the adventures of its protagonist, Lucius, who experiments with magic and is accidentally turned into a donkey. Lucius goes through various adventures before he is turned back into a human being by the goddess Isis.

Life
Apuleius was born in Madauros, a colonia in Numidia on the North African coast bordering Gaetulia, and he described himself as "half-Numidian half-Gaetulian." Madaurus was the same colonia where Augustine of Hippo later received part of his early education, and, though located well away from the Romanized coast, is today the site of some pristine Roman ruins. As to his first name, no praenomen is given in any ancient source; late-medieval manuscripts began the tradition of calling him Lucius from the name of the hero of his novel. Details regarding his life come mostly from his defense speech (Apology) and his work Florida, which consists of snippets taken from some of his best speeches.

His father was a municipal magistrate (duumvir) who bequeathed at his death the sum of nearly two million sesterces to his two sons. Apuleius studied with a master at Carthage (where he later settled) and later at Athens, where he studied Platonist philosophy among other subjects. He subsequently went to Rome to study Latin rhetoric and, most likely, to speak in the law courts for a time before returning to his native North Africa. He also travelled extensively in Asia Minor and Egypt, studying philosophy and religion, burning up his inheritance while doing so.

Apuleius was an initiate in several Greco-Roman mysteries, including the Dionysian Mysteries. He was a priest of Asclepius and, according to Augustine, sacerdos provinciae Africae (i.e., priest of the province of Carthage).

Not long after his return home he set out upon a new journey to Alexandria. On his way there he was taken ill at the town of Oea (modern-day Tripoli) and was hospitably received into the house of Sicinius Pontianus, with whom he had been friends when he had studied in Athens. The mother of Pontianus, Pudentilla, was a very rich widow. With her son's consent – indeed encouragement – Apuleius agreed to marry her. Meanwhile, Pontianus himself married the daughter of one Herennius Rufinus; he, indignant that Pudentilla's wealth should pass out of the family, instigated his son-in-law, together with a younger brother, Sicinius Pudens, a mere boy, and their paternal uncle, Sicinius Aemilianus, to join him in impeaching Apuleius upon the charge that he had gained the affections of Pudentilla by charms and magic spells. The case was heard at Sabratha, near Tripoli, c. 158 AD, before Claudius Maximus, proconsul of Africa. The accusation itself seems to have been ridiculous, and the spirited and triumphant defence spoken by Apuleius is still extant. This is known as the Apologia (A Discourse on Magic).

Apuleius accused an extravagant personal enemy of turning his house into a brothel and prostituting his own wife.

Of his subsequent career, we know little. Judging from the many works of which he was author, he must have devoted himself diligently to literature. He occasionally gave speeches in public to great reception; he had the charge of exhibiting gladiatorial shows and wild beast events in the province, and statues were erected in his honour by the senate of Carthage and of other senates.

The date, place and circumstances of Apuleius' death are not known. There is no record of his activities after 170, a fact which has led some people to believe that he must have died about then (say in 171), although other scholars feel that he may still have been alive in 180 or even 190.

The Golden Ass
The Golden Ass (Asinus Aureus) or Metamorphoses is the only Latin novel that has survived in its entirety. It is an imaginative, irreverent, and amusing work that relates the ludicrous adventures of one Lucius, who introduces himself as related to the famous philosophers Plutarch and Sextus of Chaeronea. Lucius experiments with magic and is accidentally turned into an ass. In this guise, he hears and sees many unusual things, until escaping from his predicament in a rather unexpected way. Within this frame story are found many digressions, the longest among them being the well-known tale of Cupid and Psyche. This story is a rare instance of a fairy tale preserved in an ancient literary text.

The Metamorphoses ends with the (once again human) hero, Lucius, eager to be initiated into the mystery cult of Isis; he abstains from forbidden foods, bathes, and purifies himself. He is introduced to the Navigium Isidis. Then the secrets of the cult's books are explained to him, and further secrets are revealed before he goes through the process of initiation, which involves a trial by the elements on a journey to the underworld. Lucius is then asked to seek initiation into the cult of Osiris in Rome, and eventually is initiated into the pastophoroi – a group of priests that serves Isis and Osiris.

Apologia
Apologia (Apulei Platonici pro Se de Magia) is the version of the defence presented in Sabratha, in 158–159, before the proconsul Claudius Maximus, by Apuleius accused of the crime of magic. Between the traditional exordium and peroratio, the argumentation is divided into three sections: The main interest of the Apologia is historical, as it offers substantial information about its author, magic and life in Africa in the second century.
 * 1) Refutation of the accusations levelled against his private life. He demonstrates that by marrying Pudentilla he had no interested motive and that he carries it away, intellectually and morally, on his opponents.
 * 2) Attempt to prove that his so-called "magical operations" were in fact indispensable scientific experiments for an imitator of Aristotle and Hippocrates, or the religious acts of a Roman Platonist.
 * 3) A recount of the events that have occurred in Oea since his arrival and pulverize the arguments against him.

Other works
His other works are: (familiarity breeds contempt, rarity brings admiration)"
 * Florida. A compilation of twenty-three extracts from his various speeches and lectures.
 * De Platone et dogmate eius (On Plato and his Doctrine). An outline in two books of Plato's physics and ethics, preceded by a life of Plato
 *  (On the God of Socrates). A work on the existence and nature of daemons, the intermediaries between gods and humans. This treatise was attacked by Augustine of Hippo. It contains a passage comparing gods and kings which is the first recorded occurrence of the proverb "familiarity breeds contempt": "parit enim conversatio contemptum, raritas conciliat admirationem
 * On the Universe. This Latin translation of Pseudo-Aristotle's work De Mundo is probably by Apuleius.

Apuleius wrote many other works which have not survived. He wrote works of poetry and fiction, as well as technical treatises on politics, dendrology, agriculture, medicine, natural history, astronomy, music, and arithmetic, and he translated Plato's Phaedo.

Spurious works
Extant works wrongly attributed to Apuleius include:
 * Peri Hermeneias (On interpretation). A brief Latin version of a guide to Aristotelian logic.
 * Asclepius. A Latin paraphrase of a lost Greek dialogue (The perfect discourse) featuring Asclepius and Hermes Trismegistus.
 * Herbarium Apuleii Platonici by Pseudo-Apuleius.

Apuleian Sphere
The Apuleian Sphere described in Petosiris to Nechepso, also known as "Columcille's Circle" or "Petosiris' Circle", is a magical prognosticating device for predicting the survival of a patient.

title: Apuleius


text:
Alexander Selkirk

Alexander Selkirk (1676 – 13 December 1721) was a Scottish privateer and Royal Navy officer who spent four years and four months as a castaway (1704–1709) after being marooned by his captain, initially at his request, on an uninhabited island in the South Pacific Ocean. He survived but died from tropical illness years later while serving as a lieutenant aboard HMS Weymouth (1693) off West Africa.

Selkirk was an unruly youth and joined buccaneering voyages to the South Pacific during the War of the Spanish Succession. One such expedition was on Cinque Ports, captained by Thomas Stradling, under the overall command of William Dampier. Stradling's ship stopped to resupply at the uninhabited Juan Fernández Islands, west of South America, and Selkirk judged correctly that the craft was unseaworthy and asked to be left there. Selkirk's suspicions were soon justified, as Cinque Ports foundered near Malpelo Island 400 km (250 mi) from the coast of what is now Colombia.

By the time he was eventually rescued by the privateer Woodes Rogers, who was accompanied by Dampier, Selkirk had become adept at hunting and making use of the resources that he found on the island. His story of survival was widely publicized after his return, becoming one of the reputed sources of inspiration for the English writer Daniel Defoe's fictional character Robinson Crusoe.

Early life and privateering
Alexander Selkirk was the son of a shoemaker and tanner in Lower Largo, Fife, Scotland, born in 1676. In his youth, he displayed a quarrelsome and unruly disposition. He was summoned before the Kirk Session in August 1693 for his "indecent conduct in church", but he "did not appear, being gone to sea". He was back at Largo in 1701 when he again came to the attention of church authorities for assaulting his brothers.

Early on, he was engaged in buccaneering. In 1703, he joined an expedition of English privateer and explorer William Dampier to the South Pacific Ocean, setting sail from Kinsale in Ireland on 11 September. They carried letters of marque from the Lord High Admiral authorizing their armed merchant ships to attack foreign enemies as the War of the Spanish Succession was then going on between England and Spain. Dampier was captain of St George and Selkirk served on Cinque Ports, St George's companion ship, as sailing master under Captain Thomas Stradling. By this time, Selkirk must have had considerable experience at sea.

In February 1704, following a stormy passage around Cape Horn, the privateers fought a long battle with a well-armed French vessel, St Joseph, only to have it escape to warn its Spanish allies of their arrival in the Pacific. A raid on the Panamanian gold mining town of Santa María failed when their landing party was ambushed. The easy capture of Asunción, a heavily laden merchantman, revived the men's hopes of plunder, and Selkirk was put in charge of the prize ship. Dampier took off some much-needed provisions of wine, brandy, sugar, and flour, then abruptly set the ship free, arguing that the gain was not worth the effort. In May 1704, Stradling decided to abandon Dampier and strike out on his own.

Castaway
In September 1704, after parting ways with Dampier, Captain Stradling brought Cinque Ports to an island known to the Spanish as Más a Tierra located in the uninhabited Juan Fernández archipelago 670 km off the coast of Chile for a mid-expedition restocking of fresh water and supplies.

Selkirk had grave concerns about the seaworthiness of their vessel and wanted to make the necessary repairs before going any further. He declared that he would rather stay on Juan Fernández than continue in a dangerously leaky ship. Stradling took him up on the offer and landed Selkirk on the island with a musket, a hatchet, a knife, a cooking pot, a Bible, bedding and some clothes. Selkirk immediately regretted his rashness, but Stradling refused to let him back on board.

Cinque Ports later foundered off the coast of what is now Colombia. Stradling and some of his crew survived the loss of their ship but were forced to surrender to the Spanish. The survivors were taken to Lima, Peru, where they endured a harsh imprisonment.

Life on the island
At first, Selkirk remained along the shoreline of Más a Tierra. During this time, he ate spiny lobsters and scanned the ocean daily for rescue, suffering all the while from loneliness, misery, and remorse. Hordes of raucous sea lions, gathering on the beach for the mating season, eventually drove him to the island's interior. Once inland, his way of life took a turn for the better. More foods were available there: feral goats—introduced by earlier sailors—provided him with meat and milk, while wild turnips, the leaves of the indigenous cabbage tree and dried Schinus fruits (pink peppercorns) offered him variety and spice. Rats would attack him at night, but he was able to sleep soundly and in safety by domesticating and living near feral cats.

Selkirk proved resourceful in using materials that he found on the island: he forged a new knife out of barrel hoops left on the beach; built two huts out of pepper trees, one of which he used for cooking and the other for sleeping; and employed his musket to hunt goats and his knife to clean their carcasses. As his gunpowder dwindled, he had to chase prey on foot. During one such chase, he was badly injured when he tumbled from a cliff, lying helpless and unable to move for about a day. His prey had cushioned his fall, probably sparing him a broken back.

Childhood lessons learned from his father, a tanner, now served him well. For example, when his clothes wore out, he made new ones from hair-covered goatskins using a nail for sewing. As his shoes became unusable, he did not need to replace them, since his toughened, calloused feet made protection unnecessary. He sang psalms and read from the Bible, finding it a comfort in his situation and a prop for his English.

During his sojourn on the island, two vessels came to anchor. Unfortunately for Selkirk, both were Spanish. Being British and a privateer, he would have faced a grim fate if captured and therefore did his best to hide. Once, he was spotted and chased by a group of Spanish sailors from one of the ships. His pursuers urinated beneath the tree in which he was hiding but failed to notice him. The would-be captors then gave up and sailed away.

Rescue
Selkirk's long-awaited deliverance came on 2 February 1709 by way of Duke, a privateering ship piloted by William Dampier, and its sailing companion Duchess. Thomas Dover led the landing party that met Selkirk. After four years and four months without human company, Selkirk was almost incoherent with joy. The Duke captain and leader of the expedition was Woodes Rogers, who wryly referred to Selkirk as the governor of the island. The agile castaway caught two or three goats a day and helped restore the health of Rogers' men, who had developed scurvy.

Captain Rogers was impressed by Selkirk's physical vigour, but also by the peace of mind that he had attained while living on the island, observing: "One may see that solitude and retirement from the world is not such an insufferable state of life as most men imagine, especially when people are fairly called or thrown into it unavoidably, as this man was." He made Selkirk Duke's second mate, later giving him command of one of their prize ships, Increase, before it was ransomed by the Spanish.

Selkirk returned to privateering with a vengeance. At Guayaquil in present-day Ecuador, he led a boat crew up the Guayas River where several wealthy Spanish ladies had fled, and looted the gold and jewels they had hidden inside their clothing. His part in the hunt for treasure galleons along the coast of Mexico resulted in the capture of Nuestra Señora de la Encarnación y Desengaño, renamed Bachelor, on which he served as sailing master under Captain Dover to the Dutch East Indies. Selkirk completed the around-the-world voyage by the Cape of Good Hope as the sailing master of Duke, arriving at the Downs off the English coast on 1 October 1711. He had been away for eight years.

Later life and influence
Selkirk's experience as a castaway aroused a great deal of attention in Britain. His fellow crewman Edward Cooke mentioned Selkirk's ordeal in a book chronicling their privateering expedition, A Voyage to the South Sea and Round the World (1712). A more detailed recounting was published by the expedition's leader, Rogers, within months. The following year, prominent essayist Richard Steele wrote an article about him for The Englishman newspaper. Selkirk appeared set to enjoy a life of ease and celebrity, claiming his share of Duke plundered wealth—about £800 (equivalent to £ today). However, legal disputes made the amount of any payment uncertain.

After a few months in London, he began to seem more like his former self again. However, he still missed his secluded and solitary moments, remarking, "I am now worth eight hundred pounds, but shall never be as happy as when I was not worth a farthing." In September 1713, he was charged with assaulting a shipwright in Bristol and might have been kept in confinement for two years. He returned to Lower Largo, where he met Sophia Bruce, a young dairymaid. They eloped to London early and married on 4 March 1717. He was soon off to sea again, having enlisted in the Royal Navy. While on a visit to Plymouth in 1720, he married a widowed innkeeper named Frances Candis. He was serving as an officer on board HMS Weymouth (1693), engaged in an anti-piracy patrol off the west coast of Africa. The ship lingered near the mouth of the River Gambia to resupply. However, the natives took several of their number hostages and ransomed them off for food. As the ship sailed down the coast of West Africa, men began to contract yellow fever from the swarms of mosquitoes that followed them. Selkirk became sick with the disease in early December. He died on 13 December 1721, along with shipmate William King. Both were buried at sea.

When Daniel Defoe published The Life and Surprising Adventures of Robinson Crusoe (1719), few readers could have missed the resemblance to Selkirk. An illustration on the first page of the novel shows "a rather melancholy-looking man standing on the shore of an island, gazing inland", in the words of modern explorer Tim Severin. He is dressed in the familiar hirsute goatskins, his feet and shins bare. Yet Crusoe's island is located not in the mid-latitudes of the South Pacific but 4300 km away in the Caribbean, where the furry attire would hardly be comfortable in the tropical heat. This incongruity supports the popular belief that Selkirk was a model for the fictional character, though most literary scholars now accept that he was "just one of many survival narratives that Defoe knew about".

In film
Selkirk, the Real Robinson Crusoe is a stop motion film by Walter Tournier based on Selkirk's life. It premièred simultaneously in Argentina, Chile, and Uruguay on 2 February 2012, distributed by The Walt Disney Company. It was the first full-length animated feature to be produced in Uruguay.

Commemoration
Selkirk has been memorialized in his Scottish birthplace. Lord Aberdeen delivered a speech on 11 December 1885, after which his wife, Lady Aberdeen, unveiled a bronze statue and plaque in memory of Selkirk outside a house on the site of his original home on the Main Street of Lower Largo. David Gillies of Cardy House, Lower Largo, a descendant of the Selkirks, donated the statue created by Thomas Stuart Burnett.

The Scotsman is also remembered in his former island home. In 1869 the crew of HMS Topaze (1858) placed a bronze tablet at a spot called Selkirk's Lookout on a mountain of Más a Tierra, Juan Fernández Islands, to mark his stay. On 1 January 1966 Chilean president Eduardo Frei Montalva renamed Más a Tierra Robinson Crusoe Island after Defoe's fictional character to attract tourists. The largest of the Juan Fernández Islands, known as Más Afuera, became Alejandro Selkirk Island, although Selkirk probably never saw that island since it is located 180 km to the west.

Archaeological findings
An archaeological expedition to the Juan Fernández Islands in February 2005 found part of a nautical instrument that likely belonged to Selkirk. It was "a fragment of copper alloy identified as being from a pair of navigational dividers" dating from the early 18th (or late 17th) century. Selkirk is the only person known to have been on the island at that time who is likely to have had dividers and was even said by Rogers to have had such instruments in his possession. The artifact was discovered while excavating a site not far from Selkirk's Lookout where the famous castaway is believed to have lived. In 1825, during John Howell's research of Alexander Selkirk's biography, his "flip-can" was in the possession of his great-grand-nephew John Selkirk, and Alexander's musket was "in the possession of Major Lumsden of Lathallan."

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Alexander Selkirk


text:
Anti-ballistic missile

An anti-ballistic missile (ABM) is a surface-to-air missile designed to counter ballistic missiles (missile defense). Ballistic missiles are used to deliver nuclear, chemical, biological, or conventional warheads in a ballistic flight trajectory. The term "anti-ballistic missile" is a generic term for a system designed to intercept and destroy any type of ballistic threat; however, it is commonly used for systems specifically designed to counter intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs).

Current counter-ICBM systems
There are a limited number of systems worldwide that can intercept intercontinental ballistic missiles:

 * The Russian A-135 anti-ballistic missile system (upgraded in 2017 to A-235) is used for the defense of Moscow. It became operational in 1995 and was preceded by the A-35 anti-ballistic missile system. The system uses Gorgon and Gazelle missiles previously armed with nuclear warheads. These missiles have been updated (2017) and use non-nuclear kinetic interceptors instead, to intercept any incoming ICBMs.
 * The Israeli Arrow 3 system entered operational service in 2017. It is designed for exo-atmosphere interception of ballistic missiles during the spaceflight portion of their trajectory, including those of ICBMs. It may also act as an anti-satellite weapon.
 * The Indian Prithvi Defence Vehicle Mark 2 has the capability to shoot down ICBMs. It has completed developmental trials and is awaiting the Indian government's clearance in order to be deployed.
 * The American Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system, formerly known as National Missile Defense (NMD), was first tested in 1997 and had its first successful intercept test in 1999. Instead of using an explosive charge, it launches a hit-to-kill kinetic projectile to intercept an ICBM. The current GMD system is intended to shield the United States mainland against a limited nuclear attack by a rogue state such as North Korea. GMD does not have the ability to protect against an all-out nuclear attack from Russia, as there are currently only 44 ground-based interceptors available to counter projectiles headed towards the US. (This interceptor count does not include the THAAD, or Aegis, or Patriot defenses which provide shorter range defence against incoming projectiles.)
 * The Aegis ballistic missile defense-equipped SM-3 Block II-A missile demonstrated it can shoot down an ICBM target on 16 Nov 2020.
 * In a November 2020 test, the US launched a surrogate ICBM from Kwajalein Atoll toward Hawaii in the general direction of the continental US, which triggered a satellite warning to a Colorado Air Force base. In response, USS John Finn launched a missile which destroyed the surrogate ICBM, while still outside the atmosphere.

American plans for Central European site
During 1993, a symposium was held by western European nations to discuss potential future ballistic missile defence programs. In the end, the council recommended deployment of early warning and surveillance systems as well as regionally controlled defence systems. During spring 2006 reports about negotiations between the United States, Poland, and the Czech Republic were published. The plans propose the installation of a latest generation ABM system with a radar site in the Czech Republic and the launch site in Poland. The system was announced to be aimed against ICBMs from Iran and North Korea. This caused harsh comments by Russian President Vladimir Putin at the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) security conference during spring 2007 in Munich. Other European ministers commented that any change of strategic weapons should be negotiated on NATO level and not 'unilaterally' [sic, actually bilaterally] between the U.S. and other states (although most strategic arms reduction treaties were between the Soviet Union and U.S., not NATO). The German foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, a Social Democrat, expressed severe concerns about the way in which the U.S. had conveyed its plans to its European partners and criticised the U.S. administration for not having consulted Russia prior to announcing its endeavours to deploy a new missile defence system in Central Europe. According to a July 2007 survey, a majority of Poles were opposed to hosting a component of the system in Poland. By 28 July 2016 Missile Defense Agency planning and agreements had clarified enough to give more details about the Aegis Ashore sites in Romania (2014) and Poland (2018).

Historical Project 640
Project 640 had been the PRC's indigenous effort to develop ABM capability. The Academy of Anti-Ballistic Missile & Anti-Satellite was established from 1969 for the purpose of developing Project 640. The project was to involve at least three elements, including the necessary sensors and guidance/command system, the Fan Ji (FJ) missile interceptor, and the XianFeng missile-intercepting cannon. The FJ-1 had completed two successful flight tests during 1979, while the low-altitude interceptor FJ-2 completed some successful flight tests using scaled prototypes. A high altitude FJ-3 interceptor was also proposed. Despite the development of missiles, the programme was slowed down due to financial and political reasons. It was finally closed down during 1980 under a new leadership of Deng Xiaoping as it was seemingly deemed unnecessary after the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty between the Soviet Union and the United States and the closure of the US Safeguard ABM system.

Operational Chinese system
In March 2006, China tested an interceptor system comparable to the U.S. Patriot missiles.

China has acquired and is license-producing the S-300PMU-2/S-300PMU-1 series of terminal ABM-capable SAMs. China-produced HQ-9 SAM system may possess terminal ABM capabilities. PRC Navy's operating modern air-defense destroyers known as the Type 052C Destroyer and Type 051C Destroyer are armed with naval HQ-9 missiles.

The HQ-19, similar to the THAAD, was first tested in 2003, and subsequently a few more times, including in November 2015. The HQ-29, a counterpart to the MIM-104F PAC-3, was first tested in 2011.

Surface-to-air missiles that supposedly have some terminal ABM capability (as opposed to midcourse capability):
 * HQ-29
 * HQ-19
 * HQ-18
 * HQ-15

Development of midcourse ABM in China
The technology and experience from the successful anti-satellite test using a ground-launched interceptor during January 2007 was immediately applied to current ABM efforts and development.

China carried out a land-based anti-ballistic missile test on 11 January 2010. The test was exoatmospheric and done in midcourse phase and with a kinetic kill vehicle. China is the second country after US that demonstrated intercepting ballistic missile with a kinetic kill vehicle, the interceptor missile was a SC-19. The sources suggest the system is not operationally deployed as of 2010.

On 27 January 2013, China did another anti ballistic missile test. According to the Chinese Defence Ministry, the missile launch is defensive in character and is not aimed against any countries. Experts hailed China's technological breakthrough because it is difficult to intercept ballistic missiles that have reached the highest point and speed in the middle of their course. Only two countries, including the US, have successfully conducted such a test in the past decade.

On 4 February 2021, China successfully conducted mid-course intercept anti-ballistic missile test. Military analysts indicates that the test and dozens done before reflects China's improvement in the area.

Rumored midcourse missiles:
 * DN-3
 * DN-2
 * DN-1
 * HQ-26

France and Italy

The Aster is a family of missiles jointly developed by France and Italy. The Aster 30 variants are capable of ballistic missile defense. An export customer, the United Kingdom also operates the Aster 30 Block 0.

On 18 October 2010, France announced a successful tactical ABM test of the Aster 30 missile and on 1 December 2011 a successful interception of a Black Sparrow ballistic target missile. The Horizon-class frigates in French and Italian service, the Royal Navy's Type 45 destroyers, and the French and Italian FREMM-class frigates are all armed with PAAMS (or variants of it) integrating Aster 15 and Aster 30 missiles. France and Italy are developing a new variant, the Aster 30 Block II, which can destroy ballistic missiles up to a maximum range of 3000 km. It will incorporate a kill vehicle warhead.

India
India has an active ABM development effort using indigenously developed and integrated radars, and indigenous missiles. In November 2006, India successfully conducted the PADE (Prithvi Air Defence Exercise) in which an anti-ballistic missile, called the Prithvi Air Defence (PAD), an exo-atmospheric (outside the atmosphere) interceptor system, intercepted a Prithvi-II ballistic missile. The PAD missile has the secondary stage of the Prithvi missile and can reach altitude of 80 km. During the test, the target missile was intercepted at a 50 km altitude. India became the fourth nation in the world after United States, Russia, and Israel to acquire such a capability and the third nation to acquire it using in-house research and development. On 6 December 2007, the Advanced Air Defence (AAD) missile system was tested successfully. This missile is an endo-atmospheric interceptor with an altitude of 30 km. First reported in 2009, the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is developing a new Prithvi interceptor missile code-named PDV. The PDV is designed to take out the target missile at altitudes above 150 km. The first PDV was successfully test fired on 27 April 2014. According to scientist V K Saraswat of the DRDO, the missiles will work in tandem to ensure a hit probability of 99.8 percent. On 15 May 2016, India successfully launched AAD renamed Ashwin from Abdul Kalam Island off the coast of Odisha. As of 8 January 2020, the BMD programme has been completed and the Indian Air Force and the DRDO are awaiting government's final approval before the system is deployed to protect New Delhi and then Mumbai. After these two cities, it will be deployed in other major cities and regions. India has structured a five-layer missile shield for Delhi as of 9 June 2019:

PAD and PDV are designed for mid-course interception, while AAD is for terminal phase interception.
 * 1) Outermost BMD layer at endo- and exo-atmospheric altitudes (15–25 km, and 80–100 km) for 2,000 km ranges
 * 2) Project Kusha and S-400 layer at ranges of 150, 250, 350 & 400 km
 * 3) Akash-NG, Barak-8 layer at ranges of 70, 80, & 100 km
 * 4) Akash layer at ranges of 25–30 km
 * 5) Surface to air missiles and gun systems as the inner-most ring of defense. Previously planned to acquire NASAMS-II. But Indian Air Force deterred by high cost is now looking at domestic alternative (potentially land-based VL-SRSAM).

The current Phase-1 of the Indian ABM system can intercept ballistic missiles of range up to 2,000 km and the Phase-2 will increase it up to 5,000 km.

Arrow 2
The Arrow project was begun after the U.S. and Israel agreed to co-fund it on 6 May 1986.

The Arrow ABM system was designed and constructed in Israel with financial support by the United States by a multibillion-dollar development program called "Minhelet Homa" (Wall Administration) with the participation of companies like Israel Military Industries, Tadiran and Israel Aerospace Industries.

During 1998 the Israeli military conducted a successful test of their Arrow missile. Designed to intercept incoming missiles travelling at up to 2-mile/s (3 km/s), the Arrow is expected to perform much better than the Patriot did in the Gulf War. On 29 July 2004 Israel and the United States carried out a joint experiment in the US, in which the Arrow was launched against a real Scud missile. The experiment was a success, as the Arrow destroyed the Scud with a direct hit. During December 2005 the system was deployed successfully in a test against a replicated Shahab-3 missile. This feat was repeated on 11 February 2007.

Arrow 3
The Arrow 3 system is capable of exo-atmosphere interception of ballistic missiles, including of ICBMs. It also acts as an anti-satellite weapon.

Lieutenant General Patrick J. O'Reilly, Director of the US Missile Defense Agency, said: "The design of Arrow 3 promises to be an extremely capable system, more advanced than what we have ever attempted in the U.S. with our programs."

On 10 December 2015 Arrow 3 scored its first intercept in a complex test designed to validate how the system can detect, identify, track and then discriminate real from decoy targets delivered into space by an improved Silver Sparrow target missile. According to officials, the milestone test paves the way toward low-rate initial production of the Arrow 3.

David’s sling
David's Sling (Hebrew: קלע דוד), also sometimes called Magic Wand (Hebrew: שרביט קסמים), is an Israel Defense Forces military system being jointly developed by the Israeli defense contractor Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and the American defense contractor Raytheon, designed to intercept tactical ballistic missiles, as well as medium- to long-range rockets and slower-flying cruise missiles, such as those possessed by Hezbollah, fired at ranges from 40 km to 300 km. It is designed with the aim of intercepting the newest generation of tactical ballistic missiles, such as Iskander.

Japan

Since 1998, when North Korea launched a Taepodong-1 missile over northern Japan, the Japanese have been jointly developing a new surface-to-air interceptor known as the Patriot Advanced Capability 3 (PAC-3) with the US. Tests have been successful, and there are 11 locations that are planned for the PAC-3 to be installed. The approximate locations are near major air bases, like Kadena Air Base, and ammunition storage centers of the Japanese military. The exact location are not known to the public. A military spokesman said that tests had been done on two sites, one of them a business park in central Tokyo, and Ichigaya – a site not far from the Imperial Palace. Along with the PAC-3, Japan has installed a US-developed ship-based anti-ballistic missile system, which was tested successfully on 18 December 2007. Japan has 4 destroyers of this type capable of carrying RIM-161 Standard Missile 3 and equipped with the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System. Japan is currently modifying another 4 destroyers so that they can take part of their defense force against ballistic missiles, bringing the total number to 8 ships.

Soviet Union/Russian Federation
The Moscow ABM defense system was designed with the aim of being able to intercept the ICBM warheads aimed at Moscow and other important industrial regions, and is based on:
 * A-35 Aldan
 * ABM-1 Galosh / 5V61 (decommissioned)
 * A-35M
 * ABM-1B (decommissioned)
 * A-135 Amur
 * ABM-3 Gazelle / 53T6
 * ABM-4 Gorgon / 51T6 (decommissioned)
 * A–235 Nudol (In development)
 * S-300P (SA-10)
 * S-300V/V4 (SA-12)
 * S-300PMU-1/2 (SA-20)
 * S-400 (SA-21)
 * S-300VM (SA-23)
 * S-500 Prometey (serial production began in 2021)

United States
In several tests, the U.S. military have demonstrated the feasibility of destroying long and short range ballistic missiles. Combat effectiveness of newer systems against 1950s tactical ballistic missiles seems very high, as the MIM-104 Patriot (PAC-1 and PAC-2) had a 100% success rate in Operation Iraqi Freedom.

The U.S. Navy Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System (Aegis BMD) uses RIM-161 Standard Missile 3, which hit a target going faster than ICBM warheads. On 16 November 2020 an SM-3 Block IIA interceptor successfully destroyed an ICBM in mid-course, under Link-16 Command and Control, Battle Management, and Communications (C2BMC).

The U.S. Army Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system began production in 2008. Its stated range as a short to intermediate ballistic missile interceptor means that it is not designed to hit midcourse ICBMs, which can reach terminal phase speeds of mach 8 or greater. The THAAD interceptor has a reported maximum speed of mach 8, and THAAD has repeatedly proven it can intercept descending exoatmospheric missiles in a ballistic trajectory.

The U.S. Army Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system was developed by the Missile Defense Agency. It combines ground-based AN/FPS-132 Upgraded Early Warning Radar installations and mobile AN/TPY-2 X-band radars with 44 exoatmospheric interceptors stationed in underground silos around California and Alaska, to protect against low-count ICBM attacks from rogue states. Each Ground-Based Interceptor (GBI) rocket carries an Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle (EKV) kinetic kill interceptor, with 97% probability of intercept when four interceptors are launched at the target.

Since 2004, the United States Army plans to replace Raytheon's Patriot missile (SAM) engagement control station (ECS), along with seven other forms of ABM defense command systems, with Integrated Air and Missile Defense Battle Command System (IBCS) designed to shoot down short, medium, and intermediate range ballistic missiles in their terminal phase by intercepting with a hit-to-kill approach. Northrop Grumman was selected as the prime contractor in 2010; the Army spent $2.7 billion on the program between 2009 and 2020. IBCS engagement stations will support identification and tracking of targets using sensor fusion from disparate data streams, and selection of appropriate kill vehicles from available launcher systems. In February 2022 THAAD radar and TFCC (THAAD Fire Control & Communication) demonstrated their interoperability with Patriot PAC-3 MSE missile launchers, engaging targets using both THAAD and Patriot interceptors.

Republic of China
Procurement of MIM-104 Patriot and indigenous Tien-Kung anti-ballistic missile systems. With the tense situations with China, Taiwan developed the Sky Bow (or Tien-Kung), this surface-to-air missile can intercept and destroy enemy aircraft and ballistic missiles. These system was created in partnership with Raytheon Technologies, using Lockheed Martin ADAR-HP as inspiration to create the Chang Bai S-band radar system. The missiles have a range of 200 km and was designed to take on fast moving vehicles with low radar cross-section. The latest variant of this system is the Sky Bow III (TK-3).

South Korea
Since North Korea started developing its nuclear weapon program, South Korea has been under imminent danger. South Korea started its BDM program by acquiring 8 batteries of the MIM-104 Patriot (PAC-2) missiles from the United States. The PAC-2 was developed to destroy incoming aircraft and is now unreliable in defending a ballistic missile attack from North Korea, as they have developed further their nuclear program. As of 2018, South Korea decided to improve its defense system by upgrading to the PAC-3, which has a hit-to-kill capability against incoming missiles. The main reason that the South Korean anti-ballistic defense system is not very developed is because they have tried to developed their own, without help from other countries, since the beginning of the 1990s. The South Korean Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) has confirmed that it has test launched the L-SAM system in February 2022. This particular missile has been in development since 2019 and is South Korea's next anti-ballistic missile generation. It is expected to have a range of 150 km and be able to intercept targets between 40 km and 100 km of altitude, and it can also be used as an aircraft interceptor. The L-SAM system is expected to be complete and ready to use in 2024.

1940s and 1950s

The idea of destroying rockets before they can hit their target dates from the first use of modern missiles in warfare, the German V-1 and V-2 program of World War II.

British fighters destroyed some V-1 "buzz bombs" in flight, although concentrated barrages of heavy anti-aircraft artillery had greater success. Under the lend-lease program, 200 US 90 mm AA guns with SCR-584 radars and Western Electric/Bell Labs computers were sent to the UK. These demonstrated a 95% success rate against V-1s that flew into their range.

The V-2, the first true ballistic missile, has no known record of being destroyed in the air. SCR-584's could be used to plot the trajectories of the missiles and provide some warning, but were more useful in backtracking their ballistic trajectory and determining the rough launch locations. The Allies launched Operation Crossbow to find and destroy V-2s before launch, but these operations were largely ineffective. In one instance a Spitfire happened upon a V-2 rising through the trees, and fired on it with no effect. This led to allied efforts to capture launching sites in Belgium and the Netherlands.

A wartime study by Bell Labs into the task of shooting down ballistic missiles in flight concluded it was not possible. In order to intercept a missile, one needs to be able to steer the attack onto the missile before it hits. A V-2's speed would require guns of effectively instantaneous reaction time, or some sort of weapon with ranges on the order of dozens of miles, neither of which appeared possible. This was, however, just before the emergence of high-speed computing systems. By the mid-1950s, things had changed considerably, and many forces worldwide were considering ABM systems.

The American armed forces began experimenting with anti-missile missiles soon after World War II, as the extent of German research into rocketry became clear. Project Wizard began in 1946, with the aim of creating a missile capable of intercepting the V-2.

But defences against Soviet long-range bombers took priority until 1957, when the Soviet Union demonstrated its advances in ICBM technology with the launch of Sputnik, the Earth's first artificial satellite. The US Army accelerated development of their LIM-49 Nike Zeus system in response. Zeus was criticized throughout its development program, especially from those within the US Air Force and nuclear weapons establishments who suggested it would be much simpler to build more nuclear warheads and guarantee mutually assured destruction. Zeus was eventually cancelled in 1963.

In 1958, the U.S. sought to explore whether airbursting nuclear weapons might be used to ward off ICBMs. It conducted several test explosions of low-yield nuclear weapons – 1.7kt boosted fission W25 warheads – launched from ships to very high altitudes over the southern Atlantic Ocean. Such an explosion releases a burst of X-rays in the Earth's atmosphere, causing secondary showers of charged particles over an area hundreds of miles across. These can become trapped in the Earth' magnetic field, creating an artificial radiation belt. It was believed that this might be strong enough to damage warheads traveling through the layer. This proved not to be the case, but Argus returned key data about a related effect, the nuclear electromagnetic pulse (NEMP).

Canada
Other countries were also involved in early ABM research. A more advanced project was at CARDE in Canada, which researched the main problems of ABM systems. A key problem with any radar system is that the signal is in the form of a cone, which spreads with distance from the transmitter. For long-distance interceptions like ABM systems, the inherent inaccuracy of the radar makes an interception difficult. CARDE considered using a terminal guidance system to address the accuracy concerns, and developed several advanced infrared detectors for this role. They also studied a number of missile airframe designs, a new and much more powerful solid rocket fuel, and numerous systems for testing it all. After a series of drastic budget reductions during the late 1950s the research ended. One offshoot of the project was Gerald Bull's system for inexpensive high-speed testing, consisting of missile airframes shot from a sabot round, which would later be the basis of Project HARP. Another was the CRV7 and Black Brant rockets, which used the new solid rocket fuel.

Soviet Union
The Soviet military had requested funding for ABM research as early as 1953, but were only given the go-ahead to begin deployment of such a system on 17 August 1956. Their test system, known simply as System A, was based on the V-1000 missile, which was similar to the early US efforts. The first successful test interception was carried out on 24 November 1960, and the first with a live warhead on 4 March 1961. In this test, a dummy warhead was released by a R-12 ballistic missile launched from the Kapustin Yar, and intercepted by a V-1000 launched from Sary-Shagan. The dummy warhead was destroyed by the impact of 16,000 tungsten-carbide spherical impactors 140 seconds after launch, at an altitude of 25 km.

The V-1000 missile system was nonetheless considered not reliable enough and abandoned in favour of nuclear-armed ABMs. A much larger missile, the Fakel 5V61 (known in the west as Galosh), was developed to carry the larger warhead and carry it much further from the launch site. Further development continued, and the A-35 anti-ballistic missile system, designed to protect Moscow, became operational in 1971. A-35 was designed for exoatmospheric interceptions, and would have been highly susceptible to a well-arranged attack using multiple warheads and radar black-out techniques.

A-35 was upgraded during the 1980s to a two-layer system, the A-135. The Gorgon (SH-11/ABM-4) long-range missile was designed to handle intercepts outside the atmosphere, and the Gazelle (SH-08/ABM-3) short-range missile endoatmospheric intercepts that eluded Gorgon. The A-135 system is considered to be technologically equivalent to the United States Safeguard system of 1975.

American Nike-X and Sentinel
Nike Zeus failed to be a credible defence in an era of rapidly increasing ICBM counts due to its ability to attack only one target at a time. Additionally, significant concerns about its ability to successfully intercept warheads in the presence of high-altitude nuclear explosions, including its own, lead to the conclusion that the system would simply be too costly for the very low amount of protection it could provide.

By the time it was cancelled in 1963, potential upgrades had been explored for some time. Among these were radars capable of scanning much greater volumes of space and able to track many warheads and launch several missiles at once. These, however, did not address the problems identified with radar blackouts caused by high-altitude explosions. To address this need, a new missile with extreme performance was designed to attack incoming warheads at much lower altitudes, as low as 20 km. The new project encompassing all of these upgrades was launched as Nike-X.

The main missile was LIM-49 Spartan—a Nike Zeus upgraded for longer range and a much larger 5 megaton warhead intended to destroy enemy's warheads with a burst of x-rays outside the atmosphere. A second shorter-range missile called Sprint with very high acceleration was added to handle warheads that evaded longer-ranged Spartan. Sprint was a very fast missile (some sources claimed it accelerated to 8,000 mph (13 000 km/h) within 4 seconds of flight—an average acceleration of 90 g) and had a smaller W66 enhanced radiation warhead in the 1–3 kiloton range for in-atmosphere interceptions.

The experimental success of Nike X persuaded the Lyndon B. Johnson administration to propose a thin ABM defense, that could provide almost complete coverage of the United States. In a September 1967 speech, Defense Secretary Robert McNamara referred to it as "Sentinel". McNamara, a private ABM opponent because of cost and feasibility (see cost-exchange ratio), claimed that Sentinel would be directed not against the Soviet Union's missiles (since the USSR had more than enough missiles to overwhelm any American defense), but rather against the potential nuclear threat of the People's Republic of China.

In the meantime, a public debate over the merit of ABMs began. Difficulties that had already made an ABM system questionable for defending against an all-out attack. One problem was the Fractional Orbital Bombardment System (FOBS) that would give little warning to the defense. Another problem was high altitude EMP (whether from offensive or defensive nuclear warheads) which could degrade defensive radar systems.

When this proved infeasible for economic reasons, a much smaller deployment using the same systems was proposed, namely Safeguard (described later).

Defense against MIRVs

ABM systems were developed initially to counter single warheads launched from large intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). The economics seemed simple enough; since rocket costs increase rapidly with size, the price of the ICBM launching a large warhead should always be greater than the much smaller interceptor missile needed to destroy it. In an arms race the defense would always win.

In addition to the blast effect, the detonation of nuclear devices against attacking intercontinental ballistic missiles produces a neutron kill effect from the strong radiation emitted, and this neutralizes the warhead, or warheads, of the attacking missile. Most A.B.M. devices depend on neutron kill for their effectiveness.

In practice, the price of the interceptor missile was considerable, due to its sophistication. The system had to be guided all the way to an interception, which demanded guidance and control systems that worked within and outside the atmosphere. Due to their relatively short ranges, an ABM missile would be needed to counter an ICBM wherever it might be aimed. That implies that dozens of interceptors are needed for every ICBM since warhead's targets couldn't be known in advance. This led to intense debates about the "cost-exchange ratio" between interceptors and warheads.

Conditions changed dramatically in 1970 with the introduction of multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV) warheads. Suddenly, each launcher was throwing not one warhead, but several. These would spread out in space, ensuring that a single interceptor would be needed for each warhead. This simply added to the need to have several interceptors for each warhead in order to provide geographical coverage. Now it was clear that an ABM system would always be many times more expensive than the ICBMs they defended against.

Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty of 1972
Technical, economic and political problems described resulted in the ABM treaty of 1972, which restricted the deployment of strategic (not tactical) anti-ballistic missiles.

By the ABM treaty and a 1974 revision, each country was allowed to deploy a mere 100 ABMs to protect a single, small area. The Soviets retained their Moscow defences. The U.S. designated their ICBM sites near Grand Forks Air Force Base, North Dakota, where Safeguard was already under advanced development. The radar systems and anti-ballistic missiles were approximately 90 miles north/northwest of Grand Forks AFB, near Concrete, North Dakota. The missiles were deactivated in 1975. The main radar site (PARCS) is still used as an early warning ICBM radar, facing relative north. It is located at Cavalier Air Force Station, North Dakota.

Brief use of Safeguard in 1975/1976
The U.S. Safeguard system, which utilized the nuclear-tipped LIM-49A Spartan and Sprint missiles, in the short operational period of 1975/1976, was the second counter-ICBMs system in the world. Safeguard protected only the main fields of US ICBMs from attack, theoretically ensuring that an attack could be responded to with a US launch, enforcing the mutually assured destruction principle.

SDI experiments in the 1980s
The Reagan-era Strategic Defense Initiative (often referred to as "Star Wars"), along with research into various energy-beam weaponry, brought new interest in the area of ABM technologies.

SDI was an extremely ambitious program to provide a total shield against a massive Soviet ICBM attack. The initial concept envisioned large sophisticated orbiting laser battle stations, space-based relay mirrors, and nuclear-pumped X-ray laser satellites. Later research indicated that some planned technologies such as X-ray lasers were not feasible with then-current technology. As research continued, SDI evolved through various concepts as designers struggled with the difficulty of such a large complex defense system. SDI remained a research program and was never deployed. Several post-SDI technologies are used by the present Missile Defense Agency (MDA).

Lasers originally developed for the SDI plan are in use for astronomical observations. Used to ionize gas in the upper atmosphere, they provide telescope operators with a target to calibrate their instruments.

Tactical ABMs deployed in 1990s
The Israeli Arrow missile system was tested initially during 1990, before the first Gulf War. The Arrow was supported by the United States throughout the 1990s.

The Patriot was the first deployed tactical ABM system, although it was not designed from the outset for that task and consequently had limitations. It was used during the 1991 Gulf War to attempt to intercept Iraqi Scud missiles. Post-war analyses show that the Patriot was much less effective than initially thought because of its radar and control system's inability to discriminate warheads from other objects when the Scud missiles broke up during reentry.

Testing ABM technology continued during the 1990s with mixed success. After the Gulf War, improvements were made to several U.S. air defense systems. A new Patriot, PAC-3, was developed and tested—a complete redesign of the PAC-2 deployed during the war, including a totally new missile. The improved guidance, radar and missile performance improves the probability of kill over the earlier PAC-2. During Operation Iraqi Freedom, Patriot batteries engaged 100% of enemy TBMs within their engagement territory. Of these engagements, 8 of them were verified as kills by multiple independent sensors; the remaining was listed as a probable kill due to lack of independent verification. Patriot was involved in three friendly fire incidents: two incidents of Patriot shootings at coalition aircraft and one of U.S. aircraft shooting at a Patriot battery.

A new version of the Hawk missile was tested during the early to mid-1990s and by the end of 1998 the majority of US Marine Corps Hawk systems were modified to support basic theater anti-ballistic missile capabilities. The MIM-23 Hawk missile is not operational in U.S. service since 2002, but is used by many other countries.

Soon after the Gulf War, the Aegis Combat System was expanded to include ABM capabilities. The Standard missile system was also enhanced and tested for ballistic missile interception. During the late 1990s, SM-2 block IVA missiles were tested in a theater ballistic missile defense function. Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) systems have also been tested for an ABM role. In 2008, an SM-3 missile launched from the Ticonderoga-class cruiser USS Lake Erie (CG-70), successfully intercepted a non-functioning satellite.

Brilliant Pebbles concept
Approved for acquisition by the Pentagon during 1991 but never realized, Brilliant Pebbles was a proposed space-based anti-ballistic system that was meant to avoid some of the problems of the earlier SDI concepts. Rather than use sophisticated large laser battle stations and nuclear-pumped X-ray laser satellites, Brilliant Pebbles consisted of a thousand very small, intelligent orbiting satellites with kinetic warheads. The system relied on improvements of computer technology, avoided problems with overly centralized command and control and risky, expensive development of large, complicated space defense satellites. It promised to be much less expensive to develop and have less technical development risk.

The name Brilliant Pebbles comes from the small size of the satellite interceptors and great computational power enabling more autonomous targeting. Rather than rely exclusively on ground-based control, the many small interceptors would cooperatively communicate among themselves and target a large swarm of ICBM warheads in space or in the late boost phase. Development was discontinued later in favor of a limited ground-based defense.

Transformation of SDI into MDA, development of NMD/GMD
While the Reagan era Strategic Defense Initiative was intended to shield against a massive Soviet attack, during the early 1990s, President George H. W. Bush called for a more limited version using rocket-launched interceptors based on the ground at a single site. Such system was developed since 1992, was expected to become operational in 2010 and capable of intercepting small number of incoming ICBMs. First called the National Missile Defense (NMD), since 2002 it was renamed Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD). It was planned to protect all 50 states from a rogue missile attack. The Alaska site provides more protection against North Korean missiles or accidental launches from Russia or China, but is likely less effective against missiles launched from the Middle East. The Alaska interceptors may be augmented later by the naval Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System or by ground-based missiles in other locations.

During 1998, Defense Secretary William Cohen proposed spending an additional $6.6 billion on intercontinental ballistic missile defense programs to build a system to protect against attacks from North Korea or accidental launches from Russia or China.

In terms of organization, during 1993 SDI was reorganized as the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization. In 2002, it was renamed to Missile Defense Agency (MDA).

21st century
On 13 June 2002, the United States withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and recommenced developing missile defense systems that would have formerly been prohibited by the bilateral treaty. The action was stated as needed to defend against the possibility of a missile attack conducted by a rogue state. The next day, the Russian Federation dropped the START II agreement, intended to completely ban MIRVs.

The Lisbon Summit of 2010 saw the adoption of a NATO program that was formed in response to the threat of a rapid increase of ballistic missiles from potentially unfriendly regimes, though no specific region, state, or country was formally mentioned. This adoption came from the recognition of territorial missile defense as a core alliance objective. At this time, Iran was seen as the likely aggressor that eventually led to the adoption of this ABM system, as Iran has the largest missile arsenal of the Middle East, as well as a space program. From this summit, NATO's ABM system was potentially seen as a threat by Russia, who felt that their ability to retaliate any perceived nuclear threats would be degraded. To combat this, Russia proposed that any ABM system enacted by NATO must be universal to operate, cover the entirety of the European continent, and not upset any nuclear parity. The United States actively sought NATO involvement in the creation of an ABM system, and saw an Iranian threat as a sufficient reason to warrant its creation. The United States also had plans to create missile defense facilities, but NATO officials feared that it would have provided protection to Europe, it would have detracted from the responsibility of NATO for collective defense. The officials also argued the potential prospect of U.S-commanded operation system that would work in conjunction with the Article 5 defense of NATO.

On 15 December 2016, the US Army SMDC had a successful test of a U.S. Army Zombie Pathfinder rocket, to be used as a target for exercising various anti-ballistic missile scenarios. The rocket was launched as part of NASA's sounding rocket program, at White Sands Missile Range.

In November 2020, the US successfully destroyed a dummy ICBM. The ICBM was launched from Kwajalein Atoll Richard F. Pittenger and Robert B. Gagosian (Dec 2003) Global Warming Could Have a Chilling Effect on the Military "Military planners should begin to consider potential abrupt climate change scenarios and their impacts on national defense."
 * David Vergun (22 April 2021) Defense Secretary Calls Climate Change an Existential Threat
 * Chris D’Angelo and Alexander C. Kaufman (01/18/2019) Pentagon Confirms Climate Change Is A National Security Threat, Contradicting Trump  79 Military installations; " 'Air Force's $1 billion radar installation on a Marshall Islands atoll 'is projected to be underwater within two decades'."
 * Scott Waldman, E&E News (1 March 2018) Key Missile Defense Installation Will be Uninhabitable in Less Than 20 Years :Rising seas will ruin Kwajalein Atoll site where 1,300 work and live in the general direction of Hawaii, triggering a satellite warning to a Colorado Air Force base, which then contacted the USS John Finn. The ship launched a SM-3 Block IIA missile to destroy the US dummy, still outside the atmosphere.

General sources

 * Murdock, Clark A. (1974), Defense Policy Formation: A Comparative Analysis of the McNamara Era. SUNY Press.

title: Anti-ballistic missile


text:
Talk:Apuleius

Apuleius not an initiate of Isis and Osiris?
The article briefly states that Apuleius was probably not an initiate of the mysteries of Isis and Osiris. Whose conclusion was this and what were their arguments? I've found several pages on the internet that claim he was an initiate, but none yet that take the opposite view. Can anyone give me some pointers? Thanks, Fuzzypeg 01:28, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

I strongly disagree about the need for citations in the first paragraph. These are not needed because they are basic facts about Apuleius that are well known to those who study his life and works. Moreover, the burden of proof should be on those making claims for which there is no evidence. For example, the first paragraph reads: “There is also a desire on the part of many to take details from his seemingly autobiographical novel and apply them to Apuleius, but this is not a reliable source (CITATION NEEDED) – most notably, the novel is misused as evidence that Apuleius was a worshiper of Isis, though there is good reason to think that this was not the case. (CITATION NEEDED) Another dubious conclusion is that "Lucius," the first name of the main character of the novel, was also the first name of Apuleius — wishful thinking for which there is no concrete evidence.(CITATION NEEDED).” In none of these cases is a citation needed:  in the first case, I would think it rather obvious that just assuming a novel written in the first-person must be somewhat autobiographical is absolutely absurd (or do we make that assumption for every first-person novel?), so OF COURSE this novel is not a reliable source for the life of Apuleius, even if the author occasionally plays clever literary games in which he pretends to be writing about himself being the donkey-hero of the story; in the second case, there is zero evidence that Apuleius worshiped Isis, unless one makes the illogical assumption that just because he wrote movingly about the worship of Isis means he must have been a worshiper himself (but under that logic, Irving Berlin must have been a Christian rather than a Jew, because he wrote “White Christmas”!); and third, there is no evidence from the Roman period that Apuleius’s first name was Lucius (so how on earth can there be a citation provided for a negative?). Therefore, in these cases there should be no citation necessary, because these are all accepted facts among Apuleian scholars. (That said, I’ll refer anyone who cares to John Winkler’s book “Auctor and Actor: A Narratological Reading of Apuleius,” in which he shows the foolishness of assuming that Apuleius worshiped Isis.  Winkler is also a perfectly good reference for the last two “citation needed” statements in the final paragraph.) (Posted by Gil 1970 on August 30, 2007)

EDIT: I just saw this part addressed to me after posting the above response. I'll say that since I have nothing in print on Apuleius I'm not someone who can be cited. The Winkler work I mentioned above would be the best place to go for some of this issue, but I stand by my statement that there is no need to cite statements questioning assumptions about Apuleius that cannot be proven (e.g., that his name was Lucius). The sad fact is that over the past hundred years there has been some terrible scholarship about Apuleius, and some very good scholarship, and unfortunately some of the conclusions by the bad scholars have leaked out of academia. In my opinion, these are best ignored by Wikipedia -- why confuse people by repeating wrong claims, even if an opposing point of view is included? To give an extreme example, one scholar some 50 or 60 years ago tried to argue that Apuleius may have been a Christian, and his article was nothing but a series of unfounded assumptions – surely we don’t repeat this claim, too? On the specific issue of Apuleius and the worship of Isis, you are absolutely correct that he (and his character Lucius) both belonged to certain mystery religions (Asclepius doesn't count, that was an honorary position given to Apuleius as a prominent citizen, and not a mystery religion anyway), but that still doesn't mean one should assume that Isis-worship was among them, even if it is perfectly possible that he was an Isis-worshiper. (Regarding your other question, Fuzzypeg, there is nothing in Apuleius’s description of the initiation that would have been secret from non-initiates, so Apuleius as a highly educated and curious individual simply might have known a lot about Egyptian religion.) I guess it is okay to say in the article that there has been SPECULATION that this was the case, but in no way should it be stated as fact, because there is no evidence other than the fact that the main character in Apuleius's novel experienced a conversion. (Posted by Gil1970 on August 30, 2007)

 * There's now an extensive argument to this effect within the article, but no citations for it. QuartierLatin1968 [[Image:Red flag waving transparent.png|20px|El bien mas preciado es la libertad]] 00:24, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I've added several citation needed tags; can anyone help with supplying these references? Also, some statements read like opinion rather than simple presentation of facts. Are these the opinions of one of our editors, or of a reliable source? They should be attributed. In fact, I believe I'll put an "unverified" tag at the top; that should help hurry things along. Fuzzypeg ☻ 06:21, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

There is zero evidence for Apuleius being an initiate, despite what those websites claim. I have a Ph.D. in Classics and teach it at the university level, so I would hope that my authority means something. The ONLY reason people have for thinking that Apuleius worshiped the Egyptian gods was that his account of his FICTIONAL character's conversion includes lots of details and is profoundly emotional. By the same logic, Agatha Christie must have been a killer because she revealed a lot about committing murders in her books. The burden of proof is on those who claim Apuleius WAS a worshiper of Isis and Osiris to prove it. And they can't, because no source from antiquity supports the claim. (Posted by Gil1970)

 * Unfortunately unless you're a notable authority on the subject, your views, even if they're correct, don't help us with improving the referencing of the article. But you could be really helpful, with your knowledge, by pointing us to the important studies of the subject so we can read them and cite them. This article would be much improved if it had a discussion of this evidence and allowed the reader to draw informed conclusions.

 * This is exactly backwards. Professor Gil1970 needs absoluely no authority, nor even needs to be right, to point out that unsubstantiated claims have no place on Wikipedia. Unsourced statements are fair game for anyone who wants to remove them per Wikipedia policy. Rwflammang (talk) 16:50, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

 * I would be cautious saying that there is "zero evidence" for his involvement in those mysteries. The evidence may be circumstantial, but the many scholars who have made a case for his being an initiate were citing some evidence, the most important presumably being his descriptions of his (or the fictional Apuleius') initiation in Metamorphoses. Apuleius was known to be an initiate of several mysteries, and he was a provincial priest in Carthage of some cult, possibly that of Aesculapius. Would it not be reasonable to suspect that someone with such a mystical and priestly avocation might also have entered the very popular Isiac mysteries? And would he attempt to describe something that he was ignorant of, and risk embarrassment?
 * These are just my thoughts on the subject, and they may well be unfounded, but I'd like to know why. The article currently says "there is good reason to think that this was not the case ", but what is that reason? Is there actually evidence to the contrary, or just a perceived insufficiency of evidence in favour? If you're familiar with the arguments around his supposed initiation into the mysteries of Isis and Osiris, then you could either outline these arguments for us, or even better, point us to authoritative sources that explain the issue in detail, and which we can cite in the article. Thanks for your help. Fuzzypeg ☻ 22:29, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

NPOV
"it is certainly the most entertaining example of Latin courtroom oratory to survive, though some fans of Cicero might disagree -- and firmly places Apuleius among the great humorists of his day."

This strikes me as a subjective opinion. Perhaps we could rephrase it to "it is a particularly entertaining example of Latin courtroom oratory and firmly places Apuleius among the great humorists of his day." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.43.240 (talk) 19:19, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

"half-Numidian half-Gaetulian"
I'm not disputing the factuality of this statement, but because it purports to be a direct quotation from Apuleius himself, the work and section number should be cited. Some people might be interested enough in cultural self-identification in antiquity that they would want to read the passage in context. Cynwolfe (talk) 17:09, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I fixed this. It turns out, like most biographical information about Apuleius, that the quote is from the Apology. Singinglemon (talk) 20:18, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Apuleius. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040607030012/http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu:80/jod/apuleius/index.html to http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/jod/apuleius/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:48, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Apuleius. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110720172359/http://www.chieftainsys.freeserve.co.uk/ to http://www.chieftainsys.freeserve.co.uk/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/jod/apuleius/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:47, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Apuleius. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080920112552/http://www.kabylia.info/apuleius-123-ad-180-famous-berber-writer to http://www.kabylia.info/apuleius-123-ad-180-famous-berber-writer

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:32, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Apuleius