  Ghost imaging has been receiving increasing interest for possible use as a
remote-sensing system. There has been little comparison, however, between ghost
imaging and the imaging laser radars with which it would be competing. Toward
that end, this paper presents a performance comparison between a pulsed,
computational ghost imager and a pulsed, floodlight-illumination imaging laser
radar. Both are considered for range-resolving (3D) imaging of a collection of
rough-surfaced objects at standoff ranges in the presence of atmospheric
turbulence. Their spatial resolutions and signal-to-noise ratios are evaluated
as functions of the system parameters, and these results are used to assess
each system's performance trade-offs. Scenarios in which a reflective
ghost-imaging system has advantages over a laser radar are identified.
