Haha, love the improv... but better read some books I recommend http://www.amazon.com/Phased-Array-Radar-Design-Fundamentals-Electromagnetics/dp/1891121693
He does know what he is talking about No he doesn't, and you don't either. Sprey was probably the first to reveal to wide audience that low frequency radars can detect stealth quite well which should not be disputed by anybody at this point. no he wasn't and guess what! Low frequency can only tell you its there. It cant lock a missile it cant do anything other than say hey theres something there.
Well, what do you mean by "can only tell you it's there"? You realise that stealth OFFICIALLY only reduces the aircraft visibility to 20-50km range, at which point normal radars can see you just fine, including the final guidance homing radar in air to air missiles. So let's sum it up. You are basically claiming that a low frequency radar sucks so much that it can't guide a rocket within 20km accuracy at least, and then the rocket;s radar won't be able to see the "stealth"? The whole point of stealth is to buy you 20-30km range just enough to may be outshoot some hostiles, nothing more and only the most incompetent pretend it does anything more.
Sprey also talks about jamming, which is so easy to do and cheap that stealth doesn't matter even for non-stealh aircraft. Guess what! theres countermeasures to ECM! Even better is AESA radars are hard to jam! Activevly emmiting radar emissions will get you killed if your enemy has developed a system that operates on a frequency that isn't being jammed.
Dont talk about radars please. Read a book first. Let me tell you about the inverse square law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse-square_law . When you shoot any EM beam you get only a small fraction of that energy to hit the target and then a VASTLY smaller fraction reflects back to you. AESA is no exception. If you shoot a beam out the enemy knows exactly where you are. Hell, in stealth mode you can't even do IFF or comms without everybody seeing you. No matter what radar you have you only see 100 times weaker energy signal than what your target receives from your radar. It's physics, no way around that. Countermeasures have a significant advantage over the radars due to this law and this is why they cost so much less.
It is insane people believe in the AEGIS shield which is supposed to detect small rockets with no aerodynamic constraints at speed 5000km/h from 2000km distance, but somehow a 50 times bigger giant aerodynamic B2 at 500km/h can't be detected by any radar from 200km range. well a rocket sticks out like a sore thumb on radar especially when its up on a ballistic trajectory. No ground clutter or birds or literally anything except clouds to generate a radar return.
I think you are picturing ICBMs. No, AEGIS is for small and medium range only. They are very small and only the deployed warhead travels for most of the path. The warheads generally steer and they are very low observable once the booster is released. I mean just go check a few rockets would ya?
It's one or the other. No its not. The world, technology etc. are not black and white. If you would like me to debunk the good old pierre spey interview he did saying the f35 is a disaster I will gladly debunk that for you. I can go on and on.
I am sure you can go on and on, but may be go read some physics first.