OT - U.S. Navy test intercepts warhead

[NEODARK]

Just some news to ponder about..

 

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A U.S. warship has successfully knocked down a short-range missile fired from Hawaii, the Pentagon has said, amid global concerns about a possible North Korea missile test.

 

Article: http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/06/23/navy.ustest/index.html

[GGTharos]

They've done this before, and Patriots have been doing it for a while now, too.

 

It'll work well enough against short range TBMs ... medium and intercontinental ... eeeh ... could. If they had help from an EWR.

[Crusty]

Not really a new capability, but I understand why They want to publicise this one......and link to the north Korean situation, its just typical CNN drama-queen stuff:fear:

[emenance]

HHEHE could you imagine the US responce to a north korean bottle rocket hitting our beachs? I wouldnt want to live there.

 

Or maybe everyone would just laugh.

[Force_Feedback]

HHEHE could you imagine the US responce to a north korean bottle rocket hitting our beachs? I wouldnt want to live there.

 

Or maybe everyone would just laugh.

 

You really think North Korea, or, let's say another "rogue state" like Iran, will use nuclear weapons? Guess you believed the sewage pipes "nuclear enrichment" and petrochemical installations' "chemical gas making plants" speech by Mr. Powell a few years ago. Never laughed so hard at the news before.

 

Those countries aren't retarded, the know how to build missiles, do you really think they are so stupid to launch a nuclear attack on sone country, or the US? There are better ways of destroying your beaches (shark infestations, poison, sea crocodiles or some good old jellyfishes). So what is all this hostility towards all these countries, ok, Iran got somethnig in its ground, North Korea is just a desert, no oil. Yes the countries are controlled by dictators that didn't invest lots of money in election campaigns, just to fix them later by a few %, at least they don't have all these illusions of freedom.

ABM systems existed since the late sixties, CNN is just lagging a bit behind.

[emenance]

who said anything about nukes? I honestly dont give shit at the moment what North Korea does. Looks like the UN does though. Looks like they got alot to say about alot of countrys too.

 

Really I dont know why just dont push the buttons and end all of this. Its a wicked wicked world - Black Sabbath

[TucksonSonny]

You really think North Korea, or, let's say another "rogue state" like Iran, will use nuclear weapons? Guess you believed the sewage pipes "nuclear enrichment" and petrochemical installations' "chemical gas making plants" speech by Mr. Powell a few years ago. Never laughed so hard at the news before.

 

Those countries aren't retarded, the know how to build missiles, do you really think they are so stupid to launch a nuclear attack on sone country, or the US? There are better ways of destroying your beaches (shark infestations, poison, sea crocodiles or some good old jellyfishes). So what is all this hostility towards all these countries, ok, Iran got somethnig in its ground, North Korea is just a desert, no oil. Yes the countries are controlled by dictators that didn't invest lots of money in election campaigns, just to fix them later by a few %, at least they don't have all these illusions of freedom.

ABM systems existed since the late sixties, CNN is just lagging a bit behind.

 

Why wouldn’t they do it? All you need is an immoral and dupe leader supported by their people (it already happened over and over in our history).

It was already stated that a certain country must be wiped from the map.

My personal opinion is that Iraq was only a necessary step to get (read enclose) Iran.

Of course they knew that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

[Dudikoff]

Why wouldn’t they do it? All you need is an immoral and dupe leader supported by their people (it already happened over and over in our history).

It was already stated that a certain country must be wiped from the map.

My personal opinion is that Iraq was only a necessary step to get (read enclose) Iran.

Of course they knew that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

 

Nice attitude. And what exactly did Iran do that they need to be wiped from map? Funny that it's ok if an idiot in North Korea has ballistic missiles as long as he is kept satisfied by giving him financial aid to stay on power no matter how costly that is for the eople living in that thing (I don't know what to call it).

 

And define "them". I don't think that "they" all knew about weapons of mass destruction. I would rather say that the official US government is actually controlled in a way by some much more powerful group which represents big companies interest. For example, Powell certainly made an ass out of himself reading that forged document in UN. Do you believe that he knew what he was reading? I don't even want to comment George W.

 

And it's funny. Some years ago you couldn't oppose the invasion of Iraq because "they attacked USA and will now pay", "they have nukes and chemical weapons", etc. Now that it's obvious that the government actually lied, noone actually gives a shit about it and not only the invasion is still supported, but the would-be invasion of another country which doesn't have a dictator, but also has oil and is not friendly with Israel, is even more supported. Reminds me of the Goering's saying.

 

I'm glad Saddam is out of the way but it was not done in a such well planned way that the country has a reasonable chance to became a new Afghanistan.

 

But attacking a country which has a legally elected president is a bad move. How come Iran can't have nuclear weapons but Pakistan, which "hates" a neighbouring country and it's regime stability is rather edgy to say the least, can? Because he currently is an USA ally? But what if the current president (to say it nice for a military general which is currently running the country) is overthrown like it happened in Iran some time ago? You might end up with a nuke capable country ran by radical islamists. But that's not an issue, it seems.

 

I don't want to start a flame-war. I just want to show my strong disagreement with what you're saying.

[Guest IguanaKing]

OK...this discussion is going political now, and people are getting angry enough to not understand what was written by previous posters. Just a comment on the "wiped from the map" comment. I believe TucksonSonny was talking about the Iranian President saying exactly that of Israel. Statements like that don't tend to make me believe that Iran has peaceful intentions.

 

One important detail you are leaving out of the DPRK situation is the well-known presence of over 10,000 artillery pieces well-within range of large ROK cities like Seoul. The situation there is a bit more delicate. They have been producing Plutonium since 1994.

[Weta43]

- Maybe not the place & I wasn't sure if TucksonSonny was being ironic or not, but it does seem at the moment if you're with the US in The War Against Terror (T.W.A.T.), civil rights & international law are neither here nor there; Note - Israel has the bomb in violation of international law, as does Pakistan. both help in T.W.A.T., neither has the US asking the UN to impose sanctions (in fact the only reason Israel doesn't face sanctions for not drawing back to its 1967 borders is because the US vetoes them, & Pakistan is getting aid with its nuclear technology from the US).

Cheney is just back from a trip to every tinpot dictatorship that fell out of the ex Soviet Union trying to find new friends & oil suppliers (no offense meant if you live in one of those tin pot dictatorships). No questions about civil rights and democracy asked.

The final irony - the US claims that the UN body dealing with civil rights offences can't be trusted to make decisions about the US when it has member states that don't respect their own population's civil & democratic rights on it.

2 of the offending governments being Pakistan & Saudi Arabia. Good friends & allies in T.W.A.T.

 

(in the last 15 years how many countries has Nth Korea actualy attacked ? - & how many has Israel ?)

[Guest IguanaKing]

India has nukes as well...lets not forget India.

 

Not sure if you were trying to be funny, but it is the GWOT (Global War on Terror), and both Pakistan and Israel had nukes since long before that.

[Weta43]

I was - saw it on a web site & thought it was funny (is T.W.A.T. slang in US English?)

You know how there are those differences between English English & US English? Global War on Terror or The War on Terror both sound like campaigns to get rid of horror films & dentists.

 

It's realy an international campaign against extremist Islamic fundamentalist terrorists, but it doesn't make a good acronym & doesn't fit on a soundbite (though it's something you might win, where a war on 'Terror' will never end - but maybe that's the point - ever read 1984?).

 

Re how long Israel & had nukes - I know (what was the name of that guy mossad kidnapped & they stuck in solitary for decades for letting the world know?) - & the US didn't care then either.

But they do care about the fact Indian has them. But India doesn't co-operate to the same extent.

& I'll leave it there - cause it's not the place.

[Yellonet]

I don't think so.............Right up to the point where they believe they have nothing to lose. And if you take a look at history there have been numerous instances of desperate despots and last ditch attempts to accomplish their "mission".

The question is what, or rather who, will push them over the edge...

[Yellonet]

(in the last 15 years how many countries has Nth Korea actualy attacked ? - & how many has Israel ?)

Hey! Israel are the good guys... aren't they?

 

"uhm... in this book it says that this land is ours... but their's already people living here... what to do... lets just push them together in some small peices of land and keep them there by a wall of steel, no one can judge us, we're doing the right thing, because it says so in a book"

[Guest IguanaKing]

Dead thread walking. :doh:

[Crusty]

to arms..to arms

and another and another

our god says "its all ok"

our god says "this is the way"

it says in the book "burn and destroy"

and repent and redeem and revenge and deploy

and rumble thee forth to land of the unbelieving scum on the other side

cos they dont go for whats in the book and that makes them bad

so verily... we most chopeth them up..... and stompeth them down

our invent a nice fresh bomb to poof them out of existence

 

...dumb all over:(

[Guest IguanaKing]

BINGO!!! Give that man a cigar! :D

 

"Oh lord, please guide us in using thine holy hand grenade so that we may blow thine enemies to tiny bits."

[Weta43]

Very nicely put Crusty.

[Guest IguanaKing]

Back to the original topic...does anybody remember a computer game called "Strike Fleet"? Shooting down missiles with missiles was a HUGE part of surviving in that game.

[Crusty]

They are Frank Zappa's words, I just agree with their sentiment.

 

Im extremely glad it didnt piss you guys off

back to missiles...................................Is Star wars research still ongoing?

I seem to remember the thinking back then was that space based weaponry was the way to go in countering ICBMs

[TucksonSonny]

I believe TucksonSonny was talking about the Iranian President saying exactly that of Israel.

 

Exactly!

[TucksonSonny]

Nice attitude. And what exactly did Iran do that they need to be wiped from map? Funny that it's ok if an idiot in North Korea has ballistic missiles as long as he is kept satisfied by giving him financial aid to stay on power no matter how costly that is for the eople living in that thing (I don't know what to call it).

 

And define "them". I don't think that "they" all knew about weapons of mass destruction. I would rather say that the official US government is actually controlled in a way by some much more powerful group which represents big companies interest. For example, Powell certainly made an ass out of himself reading that forged document in UN. Do you believe that he knew what he was reading? I don't even want to comment George W.

 

And it's funny. Some years ago you couldn't oppose the invasion of Iraq because "they attacked USA and will now pay", "they have nukes and chemical weapons", etc. Now that it's obvious that the government actually lied, noone actually gives a shit about it and not only the invasion is still supported, but the would-be invasion of another country which doesn't have a dictator, but also has oil and is not friendly with Israel, is even more supported. Reminds me of the Goering's saying.

 

I'm glad Saddam is out of the way but it was not done in a such well planned way that the country has a reasonable chance to became a new Afghanistan.

 

But attacking a country which has a legally elected president is a bad move. How come Iran can't have nuclear weapons but Pakistan, which "hates" a neighbouring country and it's regime stability is rather edgy to say the least, can? Because he currently is an USA ally? But what if the current president (to say it nice for a military general which is currently running the country) is overthrown like it happened in Iran some time ago? You might end up with a nuke capable country ran by radical islamists. But that's not an issue, it seems.

 

I don't want to start a flame-war. I just want to show my strong disagreement with what you're saying.

 

I am just observing and describing what is going on. I am not saying that it is a good idea to attack Iran.

The case with Iraq was different: It was not supported by the UN. This time the UN, Europe and the US are pulling together.

Personally I hope that we (the world) can solve the problem by simply putting enough AAA at these hostile borders.

[emenance]

wHAT ijozic Doesnt get that for 14 years the world has enough of Iraq's lies and the world the UN decided to do something after 1441 resolutions.

 

After 14 years of conflict and lies, after all of Saddams probation violations the world did something. If I cant believe thats true I will believe nothing else I ever hear.

 

Really Im sick of the US getting the blame for Saddam. The UN inforced military action on Iraq. It was Saddams fault.

 

Iran ? Who cares they want to attack Isreal, break international agreements, they are pissing off the UN right and left. Is the US to blame for that too?

[Weta43]

Yep - Star wars research is still going on.

 

I'd say at the moment though the most interesting thing I've read in the NYTimes lately coming out of the 'what if we try this' guys at the pentagon is the idea of putting conventional warheads onto ICBM's & deploying 2 or 3 of these per vessel along with standard ICBM's topped with MIRVs .

Apparently they're sick of getting word someone is at this cafe on the otherside of the world & having to hope they're still there when the seals / predator / F-18's get there.

With an ICBM they can hit anywhere in the world within an hour & with an accuracy of to within 10m or so.

They want 2 types of warhead - one a conventional explosive device & the other a bundle of Tungsten rods that disperse & rain down over an area.

The idea of being able to strike anywhere in the world in an hour must be appealing to millitary planners, but Russia & China aren't too keen on the idea - is it a conventional device on it's way to some warlord on the border - or inside my border - or is it a nuclear device on its way to the capital?

[Weta43]

Would those be the lies about not having any weapons of mass destruction :-)

 

 

There's a lot of regimes out there that tell lies. I don't know if there are enough troops in the world to invade all of them. (what us - listening to your telephone conversations ? - no - not us)