From: daellis94@gmail.com   
      
   Yeah, regarding the satellite questions, at least the US made sure it could   
   provide global coverage with satellites meant to monitor for the IR given off   
   by an ICBM launch.  It's really mostly a matter of having enough in orbit at   
   any one time to have    
   eyes on any potential launch point.     
      
   Determining whether or not a threat is an ICBM is generally a matter of   
   tracking an unexpected launch, usually by way of radar, in order to determine   
   more about its trajectory, point of origin, and whether its trajectory takes   
   it over any likely    
   strategic targets.  It also matters that ICBMs typically have trajectories   
   that take them considerably higher than LEO, so depending on how early you   
   will be able to see the craft on radar in real-time, it should be apparent   
   fairly quickly that the    
   launch is probably not an LEO satellite launch.     
      
   Having real-time coverage by way of radar makes satellite radar rather   
   difficult to make effective use of, although synthetic aperture radar is used   
   on orbital platforms for naval reconnaissance and other such applications   
   where some lag between a scan    
   and delivery of information is acceptable or inevitable.  As far as I am   
   aware, though, most of the actual TRACKING of a detected object would happen   
   by way of ground-based early-warning radar, like the PAVE PAWS array in North   
   America.     
      
   The most effective way of surprising launch detection systems seems to be   
   using depressed trajectories, although these severely restrict the range to   
   which an ICBM can deliver its payload, and they put significant aerodynamic   
   stresses on the structure of    
   the missile, so depressed trajectories may not be particularly feasible for   
   some ICBMs, particularly older models.     
      
   Even so, depressed trajectory launches are something that ballistic missile   
   submarines are theoretically excellent for taking advantage of, since you can   
   launch from as close to your target as you can possibly get, and an SSBN is a   
   very difficult threat    
   to counter.     
      
   Countering bombers and land-based ICBMs in a strategic first-strike scenario   
   is rather simple; you just fire your nuclear weapons at enemy air fields and   
   silo fields or silos command centers (usually the latter).  Whether the enemy   
   can fire off his    
   arsenal before your warheads arrive is another question, of course, but either   
   way, the most survivable component of the nuclear triad is, and has always   
   been, the ballistic missile submarine.  Unlike air fields and silos, they   
   move, so interception    
   requires a direct detection of the target you want to sink.  Because of   
   depressed trajectories, they are also the most effective offensive arm in a   
   first-strike scenario, since they maximize the probability that your warheads   
   will arrive before the enemy    
   can respond with launches of his own.     
      
   To my knowledge, hiding an ICBM or SLBM launch completely is nigh impossible,   
   but disguising it, while not out of the realm of possibility, mostly requires   
   that whoever is looking isn't really paying attention.  The best you can hope   
   for is to minimize    
   an opponent's available reaction time and keep his radar from detecting your   
   incoming weapons for as long as possible.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)