posted 01-29-2001 08:02 PM            

Maj Gen William Looney III, commander of US air force space operations, said: "We don't normally play space. The purpose of this game was to focus on how we really would act in space."

The military has been reluctant to talk about the results of the war game, but it is believed both sides used "cyberattacks" - efforts to disable each other's mainframe computers. The "Chinese" side also tried a pre-emptive strike by buying up all the commercial satellites it could find, blocking a vital source of support that the Pentagon has come to rely on.

Unexpected side-effects of the war game are thought to have included the new tactic of hijacking an opponent's satellites and using it to broadcast propaganda.

posted 02-06-2001 07:13 PM            

Missle Defense Test Planned

posted 03-03-2001 04:15 AM            

That vision was put on hold for the last eight years by the communist in chief, Willey the slimeball Clinton who commited blatent high treason, arming our enemies at every available opportunity and selling the Chinese the very missiles that require us to now defend ourselves against.

posted 03-03-2001 06:58 AM            

An anti-ballistic missile system, regardless of what the politicos or the spin-meisters in the Pentagon tell us, is inherintly destabilizing, as our former enemy, the Russians have been reminding us. And besides we have better things to do with our money. The only ones to benefit form a new cold war will be the industialists and the moneychangers, and it's time we drew the curtain back and saw through their charade.

posted 03-03-2001 01:17 PM            

With all due respect, CQ, that's crap. Even as far back as 20 years, it was estimated that there were some 50,000 warheads on the planet, counting theirs and ours. Do you honestly believe that ANY
Star Wars "defense" will knock down all of the opponents missiles?

First of all, don't kid yourself, calling my statements "crap" shows no respect at all. But YES I do believe this is possible with a multi-layererd defense. Most people think we might be targeting each incoming warhead, but have you considered the shotgun approach? What if the Ruskies launch 2000 ICBMs all at once. Who's to say we don't have a satellite in orbit (like the one in the movie Space Cowboys) which could lob a couple nukes in advance of the missiles from a space platform. The enemy ICBMs would be destroyed as they fly through the blast and their electronics rendered useless by the EMP radiation alone. It wouldn't take many of our defensive missiles to shoot down many of theirs (once airborne) using this approach. In short, we kill many birds with one stone.

But EMP is also something that does not necessarily have to be generated by a nuclear explosion. We could also generate this electronically by devises such as HAARP on the ground. We've been progressing in this area since the early EMP electronics destroying weapons of WWII. I think any missiles getting through the first layer of a nuclear defense will encounter many other layers along the route (such as electronically generated directed energy EMP weapons), before the enemy missiles even have a chance to release their MIRVed warheads and chaff.

If SDI doesn't get all incoming missiles but only a few, I would argue it is still a worthwhile endeavor and the money is well spent...because this technology could certainly handle a limited attack by a smaller rouge nation like Iraq. We haven't had inspectors in Iraq for the last two years. Who’s to say they don't have an ICBM by now? We already know they have a few nukes.

Without funding these ideas, no progress can be made, and when you say something can't be done, you accept defeat before you begin.

The more likely scenario is that our enemies (and our nation's foreign policy will always guarantee an endless stream of these types), if they ever get their hands on a nuke or two, will use a suitcase or a boat in a harbor or a Toyota pickup, or even UPS to deliver their damned bombs, not some multi-billion dollar ICBM with its sites set on America.

That's always a possibility. It's even possible that they have nuclear weapons pre-installed in major US cities which can be activated remotely. But again, we must develop a technology to counter this...and that takes money. For example, certain technologies may be able to help us locate radioactive materials if sent through mail, or boat. Radiation neutralizing technologies, (as much as that may sound like science fiction), may already exist. We saw this with the Reich experiments. Ponds and Fleichman's cold fusion experiments had as a by-product, the claimed ability to neutralize radioactive materials. Again, if you say all is hopeless and do not look into these areas, you give up before you begin.

These poor souls can hardly feed and clothe themselves, much less pony up the bucks to threaten us with a missile.

The people of these countries like China and Russia are indeed very poor, but these are not the ones who will possibly go to war against us. These are communist governments remember, and the elites are very wealthy (with IMF money) and highly organized and prepared for nuclear war. The people are insignificant and expendable in the eyes of the leadership. Russia, right now, has the finest nuclear missile in the world, and extensive nuclear hardened underground facilities in the Ural mountains to house the elite communist party while the people (you talk about) are slated to be incinerated in a nuclear fire. This is a war they are planning for and one they expect to fight according to General Lunev (the highest ranking Russian defector to America). China is very much the same way. They now possess our top ICBM technology thanks to the generosity of the Clinton administration. Poor or not, these people will have the capability of bombing the snot out of us in a few years.

China, a major player, will always posture and swagger regarding Taiwann...that's their job. But do you really think that they would jeapordize all of the economic gains they've made in recent years just to grab the island?

Yes. But it depends on who is our president. They now have the ICBMs to pose a credible threat to US cities, so their threats on Taiwan now have much more weight. Bill Clinton, of course, might have done nothing if China were to move towards Taiwan, but GW might make them a little more less likely to make the same move. Never-the-less, they will most probably do so at some time in the near future.

It would be emminently more rational for the mainland to continue improving relations with it's little sister...and these efforts have been and continue to be made even though our media are remiss in reporting them widely.

Well who said the Chinese communists are rational? But I do agree. The Taiwanese are also nuclear equipped and will most likely be sent military hardware by the US....so this definitely would factor in to Chinese strategies of aggression.

An anti-ballistic missile system, regardless of what the politicos or the spin-meisters in the Pentagon tell us, is inherintly destabilizing, as our former enemy, the Russians have been reminding us.

Oh really? Destabilizing for who? The Russians? Are we supposed to sit back and do nothing while the Russians continue to build and perfect their nuclear arsenal and ICBM defense capability?

While you may not believe an ICBM defense is workable, I guarantee you, the Russians do! If the Russians are afraid of us building a missile defense, don't you think this is a sign that this is exactly what we should be doing? Arguably, it was Reagan's SDI that ended the cold war because the Russians couldn’t compete with the technology. Now they've had eight years of us sitting on our hands doing nothing while they've had an incredible opportunity to get up to speed. Of course, they are not going to want us to make up lost ground. They are our enemy remember? Are you going to take advise from Russian communists who don't exactly have our best interest at heart? These are the same guys that endorsed Al Gore remember?

And besides we have better things to do with our money.

Like what? Another social welfare program? It's one of the few legitimate government jobs (as provided for in the constitution) to secure a national defense. This is exactly what government should be doing with our tax dollars.

The only ones to benefit form a new cold war will be the industialists and the moneychangers, and it's time we drew the curtain back and saw through their charade.

A new Asian cold war was started when Bill Clinton "destabilized" the world by bombing Bosnia and by arming the Chinese and looking the other way while the Russians tested new technology...all so Willy C. could distract from his own impeachment hearings. A new confrontation with Iraq began when Clinton bombed Baghdad with cruise missiles and thereby allowing inspections to stop. A new war with Israel started when Bill Clinton's own James Carville helped Barak gain power and was then subsequently encouraged to make further land concessions to the terrorist Arafat.

Clinton's actions of destabilizing the world, led to our current necessity for a workable SDI. There is no better use for tax payer dollars.


[Edited 4 times, lastly by cydoniaquest on 03-04-2001]

posted 03-03-2001 02:15 PM            

I'm curious though Sedona, who is it that you think I really am? If you don't think I'm the ex-truck driver turned network administrator that I say I am....Then maybe you should ask me questions only a truck driver or network administrator would know.

If I'm really a counter-intelligence agent of the CIA, operative for the vast right wing conspiracy (or whatever type of "spook" you want to insinuate in your paranoid fantasies) then feel free to test me on the logic of my statements. Make your counter-points and see where we might disagree. Let’s let the logic stand on its own merit......You'll never find out anything hurling insults.


[Edited 1 times, lastly by cydoniaquest on 03-03-2001]

posted 03-03-2001 03:30 PM            

Where's John Wayne when you need him?

posted 03-03-2001 03:52 PM            

If you think that if we just lay down our arms and expect our enemies will do nothing, then I would say it is you who are the dreamer. We have history to tell us time after time what happens when a nation doesn't concern itself with a strong defense.

It gets destroyed by those countries who do prepare for war.

What I'm saying, is indeed scary, but to just ignore it as we did during the Clinton years is to invite an invasion from the red Chinese or communist Russia....which is after all the goal of these countries. Lucky for us all, and thanks to the people like myself who voted for GW, we now have a man in office who is willing to deal with this issue in a responsible way. Note that his budget is able to fund SDI and still provide a significant tax cut....so what spending are you worried about?

posted 03-04-2001 03:34 AM            

I'm just one of those dreamers who when it comes to choosing between welfare for those who wear Guccis, and those who wear shoes from Pay-less...well I'll choose the latter every single time.

posted 03-04-2001 09:55 AM            

Sedona, Diane right? Cy is not someone one should be suspecious of. You make it sound as if he is some secret agent on the "message board mission" ...to do what? Talk to Us?? I know Jason. He is a highly intelligent and diverse person who has much to say on any given subject. Now when it comes to SDI, I lean toward more NSAsucks's views, but that certainly doesn't mean Jason's inputs are not important. Being that Bush has included this technology in the budget, whether it be an actual expense or not, we would be a fool to not listen to what a SDI proponent has to say.

Christy ~ Swedishoo

posted 03-04-2001 12:51 PM            

I came here this morning expecting something slanderous from the Moose-man (it's probably coming). Instead, I get these kind words from you! You are a beautiful person Christy, and you do have a powerful point: It is possible for people to have differing views without attacking each other!

I know this because I hear it all the time on the radio. If you listen to a good talk show host interview someone, there is usually respectful conversation even though both parties may disagree with each other. That is a rare thing indeed, it seems, on message boards. If you read back this thread, you'll notice that people appear to be responding negatively because I stated some conservative viewpoints, and it's apparent that I'm a conservative, rather than the specific subjects of my message. Sedona makes no attempt to even address the subject but instead goes straight on the attack! What did I ever say to Sedona that deserves such a response? In fact, I don't believe I've ever really had a conversation with Sedona on this board.

This leads me to wondering several things; Are there many conservatives who hold the chemtrail theory? Does one have to believe in these NWO conspiracy theories in order to observe and study chemtrails? Is that like an initiation into the club? It seems that's what most people here think. Why is it when someone presents a view that differs from the prevailing conspiracy theory of the day, that this warrants attack. My views may not even differ all that much from some people here in many areas, yet because I’m a conservative some people are automatically suspicious. This is a strange phenomenon.

posted 03-04-2001 05:28 PM            

Now, just for fun, I have a treat for you.

Make sure to check it out.
http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/01/12/airborne.laser/index.html

posted 03-04-2001 07:32 PM            

The significant thing to note about lasers and directed energy weapons is that they travel at the speed of light, and therefore solve the lead-time problem of targeting an enemy ICBM. If we were using electromagnetic railguns (or smart rocks) by contrast, the shooter must be very fast and deadly accurate, because shooting down a missile is like hitting a bullet with a bullet. One must also lead the target and adjust for velocity of the fired "smart-rock" projectile to coincide with the velocity of the ICBM. And if this is fired upward from the ground, you've got to take into account the effect of gravity producing a parabolic trajectory, and the effects of atmospheric drag slowing down the projectile. Even then, a slight course change of the enemy missile could cause a non-guided projectile to miss it altogether. But a directed energy weapon solves the problem. The minute the target missile is locked on and the instant the laser is fired it will hit the target, requiring little or no lead time. I wonder how long the beam must remain on the missile to weaken its outer casing though?

It seems to me if they are public with this particular information about the Boeing project, that what they have behind closed doors must be truly spectacular. By the same token, if they already have particle beam technology or EMP technology similar to the early Tesla devices, you can bet they are not going public with this any time soon!

If you study a laser, you will note that the design used to create a laser tube is very similar to Tesla's early radiant energy tubes and what was referred to as a "death ray". The design for EMP producing tubes is also very similar to laser with the difference being that laser tubes use a partially silvered mirror to cause the light to bounce back and fourth within, so as to build energy until finally, the concentration is uniform and powerful when the light beam escapes.

This leads me to a Jerry Springer final thought:

posted 03-06-2001 03:06 PM            

[Edited 1 times, lastly by cydoniaquest on 03-06-2001]