Pre-Emptive Strike
In an amazing development, two Clinton-era defense officials have called on President Bush to strike the North Korean missile on its launchpad should Pyongyang persist in its determination to fire the device. Excerpts from a signed article in the Washington Post by Ashton B. Carter and William Perry.
A year later North Korea agreed to a moratorium on further launches, which it upheld -- until now. But there is a critical difference between now and 1998. Today North Korea openly boasts of its nuclear deterrent, has obtained six to eight bombs' worth of plutonium since 2003 and is plunging ahead to make more in its Yongbyon reactor. The six-party talks aimed at containing North Korea's weapons of mass destruction have collapsed. ...
Should the United States allow a country openly hostile to it and armed with nuclear weapons to perfect an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of delivering nuclear weapons to U.S. soil? We believe not. The Bush administration has unwisely ballyhooed the doctrine of "preemption," which all previous presidents have sustained as an option rather than a dogma. It has applied the doctrine to Iraq, where the intelligence pointed to a threat from weapons of mass destruction that was much smaller than the risk North Korea poses. (The actual threat from Saddam Hussein was, we now know, even smaller than believed at the time of the invasion.) But intervening before mortal threats to U.S. security can develop is surely a prudent policy.
Therefore, if North Korea persists in its launch preparations, the United States should immediately make clear its intention to strike and destroy the North Korean Taepodong missile before it can be launched. This could be accomplished, for example, by a cruise missile launched from a submarine carrying a high-explosive warhead. The blast would be similar to the one that killed terrorist leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in Iraq.
There's one difference between Zarqawi and Kim Jong Il which will doubtless not have escaped William Perry. Kim Jong Il is a sitting head of state and, should the Taepodong be blown up in his face, can patiently devote his time to discovering how to revenge himself given he "has obtained six to eight bombs' worth of plutonium since 2003 and is plunging ahead to make more in its Yongbyon reactor". If Kim remains defiant, what do we do for an encore? Everyone knows the answer, but they ought to spell it out now, lest people say they didn't know the facts before they signed up for the ride.
posted by wretchardthecat at 6/21/2006 09:31:00 PM
63 Comments:
If the US can hit it in the lift phase of flight, that would be best.
Star Wars worthy of the name, no matter the System used.
That would send a shiver down a Mullahs spine, declaw the tiger, so to speak, flim on FOX, CNN & al-Jeezera, of course.
I don't see the strategic benefit.
If we can develop the defenses, it would be better to let them spend the money on a system that we can neutralize. If we can't develop the defenses, then we need to do something that will really make a difference in their capabilities. Economic vulnerability seems to be their weakest point. Restriction of Japanese ports could be a big stick.
China is behind Korea.
This gambit is to draw us away from Iran.
Timing is all.
quantum,
I think our missile defense is less than perfect. I was reading some comments from a retired Air Force General the other day. He was saying we've got about a 40% chance of taking it out in the boost phase with some missiles off of our Aegis frigates in the area.
The 2nd option he said was to use Sparrows stationed at Fort Greeley and Vandenberg. He said those have a kill probability of 60%. So you fire 2 of them to increase your odds.
Ah, Cedarford beat me to the Aegis slant.
It would be a mistake to test fire an anti-missile at the expected Korean launch. If we miss, the program would be compromised. If we hit, there would be a vigouous change in first strike capabilities and tactics by potential aggressors. It is better to keep potential enemies guessing about US capabilities. A cruise missile launch against the launch site makes more strategic sense. It is far more likely to succeed and demonstrates a robust American intolerance for hostile nations attaining strategic weapon systems designed to threaten the West. Let them keep guessing as to the capabilities of Star Wars.
If the South Koreans have a problem with this, I have an impeccable source that has already identified a site for strategic redeployment of US troops. Okinowa. He was after all a marine colonel.
Makes sense to me. Why wait for launch and take a chance on missing the rocket? Simply destroy it in place while launch prep is going on. The explosion would also destroy the launching area. And the authors even call for giving No. Korea 1 hour to evacuate personnel before we strike. Nice Touch.
This would also send a powerful message to Iran.
I like your thinking, Felix. But doesn't giving them 1 hour notice mean that they would just then fire? I mean it's fueled up and ready to roll (no, i won't use that term in this context), it's fueled up and ready to launch.
China concerned about N. Korean missile:
South Korea ‘s Unification Minister Lee Jong-seok said it was still unclear whether the North would fire a missile but the "government is getting ready for all possibilities," according to his aide Kim Sung-bae.
About 1,000 people including army veterans and activists staged an anti-North Korea rally in Seoul, condemning the North‘s missile threat.
Still Unclear
Sam,
If the No. Koreans can just fire the missile right now, then I agree we forget the warning. The Perry article, however, appears to say that there is a whole "preparation" cycle that has to take place before launch.
I am reminded of the scene in the Indiana Jones movie--I think the first one--where Indiana (Harrison Ford)is presented with a blood-thirsty, sword carrying, menacing savage who goes thru a sword swinging demo in front of Indiana in preparation to kill him. At which point, Indiana pulls out his holstered pistol and, bang, the bad guy is dispatched. In other words, as regards North Korea, why fool around with a mid-air shoot down? Just destroy it in place.
Further,
If the Bush administration has been considering the destroy-in-place option, this article can be seen as a green light for the operation from the "sensible" wing of the Democratic Party.
S. Korea: North missile test not imminent:
Worries over a possible North Korean launch have grown in recent weeks after reports of activity at the country's launch site on its northeastern coast where U.S. officials say a Taepodong-2 missile — believed capable of reaching parts of the United States — is possibly being fueled.
China on Thursday issued its strongest statement of concern over a possible North Korean missile launch, and Pyongyang warned of clashes in the skies as it accused U.S. spy planes of repeated illegal intrusions.
Worries Over Launch
Two points:
One: No one takes North Korea seriously -- except for the nukes. Conversely, everyone takes IRAN seriously -- even without nukes. Because Iran is a long term -- and growing -- threat to world stability.
By contrast, the NorKs are completely surrounded by societies that are whole orders of magnitude stronger than they are – and two of which are themselves run by barely-reformed thugs who would nuke NK out of existance (in a heartbeat) if it it ever became seriously annoying to even their economic interests.
Two: Bush has time left for only one more major foreign policy “initiative”. On the scale of long-term importance, that must be Iran – and he is focused on that. So he will not be distracted by "The Mouse that Roared".
I predict that the bushies will frown real hard at the NorKs over this missile "test", but that’ll be it.
If the NorKs siphon off the fuel and store the rocket, well and good. If it stayed on the launch pad, unfueled, all the better.
A preemptive strike, unneeded,
if the missle could be brought down after launch.
A lot of premium energy would be released. Proof positive to the Mullahs that their weapons developments are for naught.
Mr Reagan knew the value of just the idea of missle defense. The power of it's successful employment would give our foes pause.
Their best toy becomes a fireball in the sky. While in the best celluloid cowboy tradition, we only shoot in "self defense".
I am puzzled though, wretchard, when you say, "... If Kim remains defiant, what do we do for an encore? Everyone knows the answer, ..."
I certainly do not know the presumed, correct, answer.
Any more so than "knowing" who the enemy in Iraq is. Mr al-Sadr meets all of my presumed criteria for a radical islamist enemy of the US, but is not so treated. Amnesty has already been granted to Mr al-Sadr, which I "knew" could never happen. Not after his spring time rebellion and the murder indictment by an Iraqi court.
Cedarford,
It is my impression that the Clinton and Perry team (with significant help from Albright and Berger) did resolve this problem years ago.
We just have to watch the success story in action!!!
Get your champaign glasses ready!!!
Rockets are notoriously touchy. There was a time in the 60s when I thought we we're working our way to the moon one yard-at-a-time.
Shouldn't take much technical wizardry to see that the NKs have the same experience.
Just like publishing documents that might put a single soldier's life at risk, there's no reason to do anything more than rattle ABM swords today. It's more important to save that capability (and insure that all potential enemies doubt its effectiveness) for a serious threat.
Ari Tai,
If the anti-missile capability is effective, showing it would be a good thing...
If chancy or ineffective, showing our lack of capability would be a bad thing
I think that in balance al-Sadr helps more than he hurts at the moment. al-Sadr's death squads are one of the few incentives for the Sunnis to give up their civil war and submit to democracy.
(Coalition forces are opposing the Sunnis too, but in some areas of Iraq the local population is complicit, so the resistance gets away with it.)
Every Saddamite al-Sadr kills is a step forward too. I would never call al-Sadr a friend, but the enemy of my enemy makes a useful temporary ally.
If the objective really were to kill all the "Saddamites", it could be done by unleashing Col. Saad and his troops.
Regardless, at Westhawk they have an interesting piece on announced planned troop deployments to Iraq.
The draw down has begun, and will amount to a 27% reduction in combat brigades by year end.
To interesting quotes from the piece, the first. "...Manpower totals quoted on the two statements add up to 113,000. This compares to roughly 132,000 currently in Iraq and the Iraqi government’s stated goal of having U.S. manpower below 100,000 by the end of this year. ..."
But the second, part of an AP story from Camp Anaconda,
"... In the last four months, the Army has tagged 7,000 Humvees and 17,000 other pieces of equipment to be shipped to the United States to be rebuilt. They then will be distributed among active and reserve units at home, or possibly returned to equip Iraqi security forces. ..."
The pull out of equipment has already begun, the troops rotated back to US, beginning to not be replaced.
When the MSM begins covering this story, is that "good" or "bad" for the effort? Or will it depend on the spin.
Word leaks out, the US is covertly bugging out, White House denies claim.
or
Mr Bush announced today the fulfillment of the primary Mission Goals in Iraq. That in partnership with the Iraqi government the US was inititiating a manpower draw down. In conjunction with our other allies, Japan, England and the Ukrainians. While at the same time building up the Iraqis independence of action. Providing improved logistical capacity with trucks and Humvees, recycled from the conflict.
One of the background pieces for westhawk's piece is by AP Correspondent Ryan Lenz was embedded with the U.S. Army Field Sustainment Brigade, which oversees the Army's military equipment in Iraq.
The link is to the San Diego Union-Trib.
It would be nice to know what the real capabilities of the missile defense system is; i.e. how confident we really are that it would work. The worst thing would be to try and shoot it down and not succeed.
I vote for the preemptive strike.
Liquid fueled missiles can sit loaded on the pad for years, as the Titan IIs did in the U.S. and many Russian ICBMs still do.
The propellants used in the Tapeodong, which is based on the SS-1 Scud, are basically mineral spirits and Nitric Acid - not nearly as bad as the stuff we and the Russians use. And lots and lots of Nikes and SA-2's AA missiles sat around for years and years loaded with that stuff and hardly ever blew up. The fuel is basically what you use to clean paint brishes and the oxidizer requires far less precautions than does, say N2O4 or even LOX. A Scuba tank and rubber gloves will do.
Admitedly, detanking can be dicy if you are a complete and total incompetant that cannot use the Self Service lane at a gas station. And after you detank, if you were equally stupid in designing the rocket - and did not incorporate prevalves - you likely need to clean it out and change the seals.
I think that Carter and Perry are feeling the hot breath of history on their necks and want the 2nd Taoepodning launch taken out before their legacy - and maybe Los Angeles - takes another hit and they start getting invited to Texas necktie parties.
By the way we are talking about Flight No. 2 - The N Koreans already launched one on 31 Aug 1998 that made it almost all the way to Alaska, follwing a CIA report that said "Ain't Gonna Happen Soon" and a Congressional study that said "You Wanna bet?"
You gotta admire the North Koreans's sense of timing. They come clean on their nuke program a few days after Jimmy Carter gets the Noble Peace price for shutting them down and start doing missile test preps as the Eurowobblies meet with Pres Bush over one of their most promising ballistic missile customers.
Gotta be Karl Rove's work!
Either that or that Liberal Nightmare: Reality.
ex helo,
I'd agree that if not confident of the ABM capacity, preempting the launch could be an option. But if the confidence levels were high that a successful interception was possible, I'd go for that option.
There is after all only the one rocket and we know where it is.
Meanwhile our earnest ally, President Karzai is unhappy with US & NATO tactics being used in Afghanistan.
"... More than 600 people, mostly militants, have been killed in recent weeks as insurgents have launched their deadliest campaign of violence in years. At least 14 coalition soldiers have been killed in combat since mid-May.
“It is not acceptable for us that in all this fighting, Afghans are dying. In the last three to four weeks, 500 to 600 Afghans were killed. (Even) if they are Taliban, they are sons of this land,” he said. ..."
It is an report carried by msnbc.
There is liitle to be gained by a pre-emptive strike against the Korean missile test. It will be a loss diplomatically. The politics and diplomacy will favor US action after a successful Korean launch. The second test launch would favor a US preemptory strike. The point to the North Korean test is all for politics and prestige. It in itself is a non-military event. An unsuccessful US attempt to shoot it down would be a major coup for them. The world would expect the US to be able to shoot it down. Please explain to me what the US gains if we miss? .
Karzai needs a vacation or someone sent him a dead fish. He would not last the echo of the last chopper.
Indulge me one further point. It would be better to let the Koreans launch number one so that we can determine their capabilities.
2164th:
This next one is Number 2!
Number 1 was launched on 31 Aug 1998. It was either a successful ICBM test or - as the N. Koreans claim - a failed space launch (which they claim was successful, too, but no one else saw the satellite).
“I strongly believe ... that we must engage strategically in disarming terrorism by stopping their sources of supply of money, training, equipment and motivation,” Karzai said during a press conference.
Maybe Karzai wants to invade Pakistan, the source of terrorism.
RWE
Eight years between launches is not a test. It is nostalgia.
There's also a nuclear EMP burst in our upper atmosphere, which could make 9-11 look like a tea party. All electonics would fail; power grids, water systems, computers, cars.
This launch might not be a test, in other words, but a sneak attack a la Pearl Harbor by the Chinese using their dummy, Kim il Jong.
I'm not too conspiracy minded, but I do know a bit about EMP. I hope this rocket mysteriously explodes on the launch pad. Best for all concerned.
2164h: Well, gee, since the first test they admitted to having a nuclear program, and very possibly nuclear weapons. Further tests would have given us a better look see at the missile but may not have told them much - they likely only get a look at the 1st stage burn, govin their no doubt limited tracking capabilities.
Reports were that the solid fueled third stage did not work so well on flight No.1. Since that time a N. Korean ship went to Syria and Germany and took on a load of the materials required to make modern solid rocket motors, among other things.
From CNN:
On North Korea and its possible test of a long-range ballistic missile, Cheney rejected a pre-emptive U.S. military strike, saying current diplomatic moves can deal with the issue.
"I think, at this stage, we are addressing the issue in the proper fashion," he said. "Obviously, if you are going to launch strikes at another nation, you better be prepared to not fire just one shot. The fact of the matter is, I think, the issue is being addressed appropriately."
Cheney was asked about a Thursday op-ed piece in The Washington Post from William Perry, defense secretary under President Clinton, and Ashton Carter, Clinton's assistant secretary of defense, which said the United States, if necessary, should strike beforehand and destroy the missile before North Korea tests it.
Cheney said that, while "I appreciate Bill's advice," such an action could worsen the situation.
Not that we can not, habu, I'd never tell you that.
But that we will not, upon that you can rest, assured or not.
The short story of Camp Taji's COIN operations, at westhawk, and then the kidnapping of 85 workers from a factory in that very city, on the same day. Illustrates the failures of the current tactical policy, better than any narrative.
A preemptive strike into Pakistan, taking down aQ in it's sanctuary, Mr Karzai may have a new & novel idea, there.
Mr Karzai seems unconcerned about the possible threat from his homegrown insurgents, perhaps he thinks they are not going to be a threat. Not without outside help, Assistance from Warizistan may be all the problem really boils down to. From Mr Karzai's perspective.
Jim, northern ca: After the North Koreans admitted that they had never shut down their nuclear program, I heard a former Clinton policy advisor/North Korea "expert" say on the radio: "Gee, this is a surprise. We never imagined they would do something like this. Who woulda thunk?"
So I guess that stunned shock at being played for suckers is their version of "remorse."
We already have the correct potentially winning strategy in Iraq. The only thing that matters now is whether the Sunnis choose peace, or to keep fighting the central government. The pressure from the Shia, our forces, and the political carrots being waved in front of them are the keys.
We can't fight an entire population, the Sunnis. Either they need to be turned to democracy, or Iraq gets partitioned. Continued occupation in that case would be neither moral nor useful.
If Karzai wants to find the alternative to warfare with the Taliban he should look in the mirror. His job as political leader is to lure the potential Taliban soldiers into the political system, leaving only the hard core to be killed in battle.
Karzai made a big deal out of letting most of his enemies go, which is supposedly the Afghan way. Supposedly that would lead them to join the government instead of heading out to the caves to be rebels.
"Mr Reagan knew the value of just the idea of missle defense. The power of it's successful employment would give our foes pause. "
you mean faux pax?
Couldn't help it. Yeah a miss in boost phase would not be very reassuring. It's harder to know when the bad guys are launching and from where. The Soviets had excellent mobile missile systems.
There are decoys... MRVs, and now the Ruskies have developed a steerable war head after the midcourse phase that puts a damper on any incept calculus. Maybe it would be better to take out the launch facility and the rest of that turds strategic capabilities while you're at it.
It's impossible and never worked. If the entire population keeps on fighting, then the only two choices are to kill them all or stop the war. It's tough to believe anyone could argue with that.
Fortunately according to Rumsfeld in today's press conference, the Sunni Resistance is negotiating now for their equivalent of "peace with honor". That proves my point, that an all our war on Sunnis would have been a bad strategy and instead we needed a combination of diplomacy (for the Sunni people) & war (for their terrorists).
Life isn't as much fun for the Sunnis any more. Rumsfeld announced that Iran is training & arming Shia commandos [and we know they have been fighting Sunnis]. The US had to hold back on rolling up some Al Qaeda leaders until they had Zarqawi, but no more. Iraqi has an inclusive elected government that the Sunnis themselves voted for.
For awhile there the Sunnis had it as good as Arafat: support terrorism, deny supporting it by saying they are opposing only the foreign "occupiers", and at the same time demand to be negotiated with. With an elected government, rival Shia terror squads, and more Baathists vanishing every day, their dream of turning back the clock seems less likely every day.
http://www.dod.gov/news/Jun2006/20060622_5489.html
Interesting article from DOD. Calling Al Qaeda jihadis is a compliment, saying they are following their religion properly.
"We should describe the Islamic totalitarian movement as the global hirabah, not the global jihad"
RWE:
Why would I WANT to detank in the self-service line?
---
'Rat:
Maybe Karzai figures we ought to be bombing where AQ are trained, funded, and led from?
Might even hit Z2 or someone else there.
Perhaps he's been reading BC's comments.
Habu,
But NOT the Shining Path.
Do I get half credit if I master the nozzle, but not the computer?
Fortunately, Doug, no one will ever let you get your hands on a ballistic missile.
I used to have 10 of them. Was looking for some reentry vehicles for them to keep the wind out of the front end during a possible series of SDI tests and Sandia asked me "Did you want those with the devices in them?"
Told them no. I decided being my own nuclear power would be a real hassle.
National News from The Associated Press
U.S. Military Intercepts Medium-Range Missile in Test 100 Miles Above the Pacific
06-22-2006 5:03 PM
HONOLULU -- A Navy ship on Thursday intercepted a medium-range missile warhead above the earth's atmosphere off Hawaii in the latest test of the U.S. missile defense program, the military said.
The Missile Defense Agency said the test had been scheduled for months and was not prompted by indications that North Korea was planning to test launch a long-range missile.
The USS Shiloh detected a medium-range missile after it was launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai, then fired a Standard Missile-3 interceptor.
The interceptor shot down the target warhead after it separated from its rocket booster, more than 100 miles above the Pacific Ocean and 250 miles northwest of Kauai, the agency said in a statement.
The test marked the seventh time in eight attempts the military has successfully shot down a missile target with an interceptor fired from a ship.
rwe knows I'm busy with the ones that blow up on the way up.
On Purpose.
Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) is the instantaneous release of a wide spectrum of electromagnetic radiation from the nuclear disintegration of the material in a nuclear device. There should be a classic bell curve of energies per frequency, following typical black-body radiation emmissions, with the peak determined by the mass of the material and the efficiency of the design. (Please, anyone with physics training correct me...)
The earth’s atmosphere is opaque to a lot of frequencies, and distance will attenuate all frequencies according to the inverse square law, just like any other form of energy. A single nuclear weapon even in the range of hundreds of kilotons, can NOT disable the entire country. (Think about it... during the 1950’s there were plenty of atmospheric tests AND high-altitude tests of devices with far greater yields than the Hiroshima & Nagasaki bombs, and none of them caused any detectable EMP damage outside the test areas...) Most of the country would be beyond the horizon for a low altitude detonation, and protected by the intervening atmosphere by a high-altitude blast. ªPlease, anyone with physics training correct me...)
What is vulnerable is the worldwide system of satellites we’ve placed: communications, weather observation, GPS, etc.
The people who will immediately suffer are all the trendy folks driving their big-ass SUVs off-road in the wilderness. They’ll have to get out a compass and a topographic map, if they’ve strayed far from the trail. Hope they brought along some extra jerky.
But seriously, our military may need to re-establish ratings in celestial navigation, as a backup to GPS-dependent plotting. Subs have inertial guidance. What other military vehicles use such stuff? I would think the GPS satellites have been hardened to reduce their vulnerability to EMP... Presumably scientists, the military and system designers have been considering this for decades.
Sorry if someone's pointed this out in the 70 odd posts above...
..but surely the time for pre-emptive strikes was when they were still trying to obtain the nuclear devices that most analysts agree they now have?
Reactions to North Korean posturing also frequently fail to account for the extent of genuine NK fear and hatred of Japan.
Japan has earned this, frankly, through failing to address the evils of WWII, which for Koreans was only the tail end of decades of vicious occupation.
Habu thinks California will get by with Celestial Seasonings.
Oh, yeah. Of course, non-military Non-hardened communications systems could be affected. Cell phones, internet, commercial TV & Radio — anything dependent on microwave transmission & reception.
I assume all of you have backups, eh?
I personally have a large supply of fine-grained mud, suitable for clay tablets, and a bunch of chopsticks saved from take-out meals. I will re-invent cunieform writing, and learn to each bugs.
In addition, I have stockpiled a substantial supply of chalk with which to mark the shadow outlines of acquaintances vaporized in the blast, and so memorialize them.
I'm sorry, which religion is "Red" and which is "Blue?"
Sorry...
"I will re-invent cunieform writing, and learn to EAT bugs."
With the bust of the Sears Tower Seven, in Miami, Ms Malkin raises an intersting point for all the search profilers on the NYC subways and the TSA waiting lines.
Some of the suspects are "blacks".
Not Arab but, African Mohammedans.
Now we'll have to stop and search every black person in America, only prudent course to take, no?
Election Reform '08
More New Tone News:
Space Shuttle renamed
"Space Subtle"
Move called warlike and provocative by 10 Clintonistas in the CIA held over because of, you guessed it:
The New Tone.
Word leaked to MSM by sources in the CIA who requested anonymity due to the top secret nature of the information.
Cederford: No, I just needed some RV's to keep the wind out of the front end of the missiles while something shot at them (cue the Star Wars theme music here). They were configured for the old MK II copper heat sink warheads and it obviously would be cheaper and easier to get some of the old RVs rather than build something new that fit the top of the rockets. We never did find but one, a training model - and it turns we had that one in the warehouse and MDAC was trying to dispose of it even as I was looking for 4 more. And by the way, if you want to see the DRMO surplus people get excited, have one of them misread an NSN and think you are trying to surplus a real nuke.
Also, the old MK-II shows that it really is very easy to build a re-entry vehicle. It is much harder to build one that is fairly light and does not come in at a subsonic velocity.
Mad Fiddler; EMP is an atmospheric phenomanon and is a problem for electronics here on Earth. It can propagate beyond the line of sight, to a degree. Our satellites can withstand nuke bursts as long as it is not so close as to actually fry them. I suspect that even the civillian birds can handle the effects to some extent because they have to withstand the space environment for extended periods.
I would suspect that the North Koreans could do a high altitude EMP-producing burst much easier than they could hit a city - you don't need an RV to do that, teh very crtical problem of fusing is much easier, and accurcay is less critical. However, whether done over Japan or over the U.S. the result would be like shooting a Kodiak Bear with a .22 short. When he gets over being scared by the noise and the sting....
Okay, mad fiddler, you get the coffee spewing award for today. I haven't laughed so hard at the last three Hollywood comedies I've watched. Not that that says much of anything, alas.
I agree with rwe that the results of an EMP would be like shooting a bear with a .22. Although taking down the World Trade Center was also like shooting a bear with a .22.
I'd prefer not to get shot, with a .22 or otherwise. Let's swat this rocket but good before we get there.
You guys might be interested in the 747 ABL developement program.
My company made the gimbal/housing for the nose of the developement aircraft, so we get occasional progress reports.
Apparently, it's ready to go into production. I wouldn't be too surprised to hear that a 747 with a mis-shapen nose has recently been sighted at one of our airbases in the Pacific.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
As some have already suggest this is a political ploy from the left.
"I voted for the preemptive strike - before I voted against it..."
Dear RWE,
Thanks for the further information on EMP. I've looked up some info and found a fairly comprehensive online text from Princeton on the effects of nuclear weapons.
The link is:
here
www.princeton.edu/~globsec/publications/effects/
Post a Comment
<< Home