U.S. Military Intercepts Missile in Test

[Rose Siding]

HONOLULU -- A Navy ship 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 Thursday.

The military had initially scheduled the test for Wednesday but postponed the drill after a small craft ventured into a zone that had been blocked off for the event.

The USS Shiloh detected a medium-range target after it was launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai, then fired a Standard Missile-3 interceptor.
...
The 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.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/22/AR2006062201452.html

[joemurphy]

1. Why am I skeptical of this report? n/t

[Demeter]

14. You Know Too Much

There's a long history, and you and I know just how unlikely this is.

[cantstandbush]

18. Why are we allowed to test and no one else? n/t

[hobbit709]

2. And how rigged was this test?

Their previous tests had the target's IFF beacon on to give the antimissile something to home in on and they still failed miserably. It's easy to hit a target if you exactly when/where it is and have a precomputed firing solution. In the REAL world it doesn't work that way.

[VegasWolf]

7. I am sure this test used a "here I am" transponder like all the tests.

It would be embarrasing to try a real test at this point and have it miss completely.

[Vidar]

42. Right you are!

[The_Casual_Observer]

3. "the military said" ergo 6 months from now a "correction"

to this story, "it didn't quite happen like that".

[Ilsa]

4. I'd practice too, if I was in charge.

If PRK did a test-fire and we decided to intercept, I wouldn't want to have to explain why the intercept failed.

[cyberpj]

5. The agency said the test was not prompted by North Korea.

Of course they did.


And this is not planted propadanda as a show of muscle either.......

[Rose Siding]

6. Eh? What's that?

It's hard to hear over all the saber rattling.

[Solo_in_MD]

8. It wasn't

Those test take months to set up, and are scheduled often a year in advance or more, well before PRK got their toy assembled on the pad.

[Dr Fate]

11. Assuming it even happened. Photos? Film?

Sorry, but after "WMDs" and "Saddam caused 9/11" I dont believe the Washington Post anymore.

[Solo_in_MD]

15. I agree about the WaPo

But I don't doubt it happened. What I would want to know is the test parameters (type of taget, intercept path, notice given, etc). That makes the difference between a staged event and a real world representative one.

[Dr Fate]

22. I'm playing the skeptic to a degree- but really- photos? Film? n/t

n/t

[Dr Fate]

9. Where are the clear photos or clear film footage of this?

I dont see anything in this report where the newspaper asked them for it either.

It appears they are just taking their word for it, even after "WMDs" and literally hundreds of other lies.

I dont believe this story- there is a lie in here somewhere, I just know it.

[PurityOfEssence]

10. hahahahahahahaha

Truly the biggest boondoggle in American history, missile defense DOESN'T WORK.

Me? I'm just an art spaz child of generations of scientists and engineers, but before going off on my wayward course, I took a hell of a lot of science courses and entered college as a science major.

Dad was a missile designer at the time of my birth, and he absolutely seethes at the concept of the SDI. (He's still working now at 75 and his career has been one of many defense applications.)

Hit a bullet with a bullet? Yeah, I remember seeing one at the Gettysburg museum when I was a pup, but the very fact of it being an exhibit shows the sheer infrequency of it.

The tests have failed. During the first gulf war in '91, the Patriot Missile didn't shoot down EVEN ONE SCUD.

This is playing upon the fears of the ignorant to enrich the clever.

It's about money and fear, and when you look at the amounts of money, it's sickening.

[cyberpj]

12. Its about $ + fear and when you look at the amount of money its sickening.

Well said.


And only possible when the press is owned.

[PurityOfEssence]

17. It's pretty much over, isn't it?

There is no oversight from the so-called fourth estate; the need to have access to cold-blooded reactionaries who will deny anybody but the goose-stepping stalwarts any contact pretty much precludes quaint concepts like "oversight" or "perspective".

The media wants to be part of the club, and the elites--let's not mince words here, let's call them monarchic nazi greedhead worshipers of money and unchecked power--brook no dissent.

Thou shalt never question monied power; it is the religion of America. When religious idiots rail on about how puritans and religious folk founded this country, it's beyond silly; Jamestown pre-dated the pilgrims by 13 years, having black slaves a year before the pilgrims' landing, and it was a PURELY COMMERCIAL VENTURE. America started strictly for profit, and THAT is our true religion. This country has always been about personal and private money. The fact that we have so many religious crazies here just clouds the issue; the god of America is money, and far too many of us will band together to make sure nothing stands in its way.

Money and the unfettered sustaining of it (no matter how others have to pay for one's wealth) is the true god of this country.

We went ugly in 1980, and it's just gotten worse since then.

Three cheers for the fairness doctrine.

Yes, it's going to be a bumpy ride.

[cyberpj]

36. There is no oversight from the so-called fourth estate;

There is no oversight from Congress.
There is no outrage from The People.

Will History itself ever reveal the truth of what happened here?

[HuffleClaw]

13. *cough cough* bullshit *cough*

suuuuuuure they did. the propaganda is coming fast these days. i guess real news isn't enough for 'em seeing as they feel the need for manufacturing a little crisis.

[daleo]

16. This is very convenient

I sense a propaganda buildup about missile defense. Most of what we heard about the Patriot missile interceptor 15 years ago turned out to be lies.

[MagniCynic]

19. As funny as missle defense is....

Shouldn't we all want this program to work? This is assuming a whole bunch of other factors are correct (budget, accuracy, ease of use, etc) but shouldn't we really all be hoping this works simply for security's sake?

[Robb]

20. I also would like to crap ice cream

The math on missile defense is staggering.

If you don't want your car stolen, you don't get a Ferrari and park it in a bad neighborhood. If you don't want to get crap shot at you, you shouldn't be an arrogant prick. Not "you," but "you" as in "one."

Forgive me, I'm a little grumpy. :D

[fasttense]

27. We can hope but we shouldn't ignore the facts.

Lou Dobbs reported that so far tests indicate, our defensive missiles only have a 50% accuracy rate. And that success rate is in testing, which of course, is simpler than a real situation.

[The_Casual_Observer]

29. They love people like you, hope like that has kept a worthless

program alive for 25 years with zero results at the cost of 100 billion at least.

[K-W]

35. The big problem with the missle defence system

is that thwarting such a system will likely cost much less than building it. An opponant would only have to invest in enough missles and dummy missles to overwhelm the system.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

40. I'd like them to dig a tunnel to the moon.

But that's not going to happen either.

[Gman]

21. At best, this is a big time weasel

at worst it's a bald faced lie.

[samsingh]

23. timed with news out of North Korea

so they don't have to go after a real threat, unlike the made up one in Iraq and now Iran.

[nealmhughes]

24. The Navy said if was from the Shiloh.

Her homeport is San Diego and is a guided missile cruiser with a complement of 387. If there was testing, then there were riders onboard, as well, for the launch and for the tracking. Say 400 people. Now some would not have been able to have seen or heard much, being below decks, but if they were anywhere topside, there would be a lot of people to have seen it light off.
Believe me. If they had made it a blind item, it might be propoganda, but had it been unsuccessful then we would never hear about it at all...
That doesn't mean that it wasn't as staged as all the other "staged" successes there have been...

[Nihil]

26. And all the observers could say would be "Ooohh, pretty!"

The "interceptor" rocket gets launched, rises up into the sky
then there is a bang and some fireworks to represent the "hit".

"Of course the test was a success - didn't you see it?"

As you say, a staged "success" ...

The saddest thing is that some people believe the lies.

[Mr. Mojo Risin]

25. I agree there is much to debate about this subject

Whether or not the money spent on missile defense is worth it? Good question.

Test parameters in question? Fine again.

Saber rattling? Undoubtedly.

But the technical feasibility of missile defense is not in question. At what cost...I don't know. Is it worth that cost. Up for debate. I'm very familiar with the large programs within the defense industry. All large programs that push the technological envelope like this one almost always have shortcomings in the early stages. The problems on this program are certainly well documented. But that is why they call them "tests". They are just that.

Much to debate about the cost/benefit of such an undertaking. But I guess I wish to disagree, completely, with those previous posts who wish to say, "it can't be done". It's already been done. And it will be done more effectively in the future. Never know, but it may just save our ass someday.

[fasttense]

28. Well, not exactly

"It's already been done." I understand that under test situations the accuracy rate is about 50%. Lou Dobbs reported on this, I think last week. A fifty/fifty chance of success does not make me feel comfortable. Now, when it looks like we really need some kind of protection, they start working on testing them again. Why weren't they working on them before now? Where is the planning and testing that normal military procedures demand? Why have they waited this long to improve on this?

This is just the typical bureaucratic dysfunction and incompetency of the * regime.

[The_Casual_Observer]

30. I'll bet that your paycheck depends on worthless

defense projects.

[Mr. Mojo Risin]

31. Very Intellectual Comeback - the shoe fits

This is a defensive project with a goal of shooting down incoming ballastic missles.....

Crazy me, I actually hope it works.

[The_Casual_Observer]

33. I hope Santa leaves you lots of nice toys for Christmas too!

[K-W]

32. No, it has never been done. Only simulated.

And even then they often miss.

[Mr. Mojo Risin]

34. Very good point

It has never been done, only simulated, as no country has yet fired a ballastic missle at the states.

Yet.

[mccoyn]

38. You mean they didn't solve everything on the first try?

</sarcasm>

The task of getting one missile to intercept another is tough enough. So they left out the headache of putting a missle tracking system on a missile for the first few tests, big deal. No one, ever designs a complex system completely before testing a part of that system. It would be insane and wasteful.

[Solon]

39. Who ever assumed the system was SUPPOSED to work in the first place?

First, the program has been in testing stage since at least the mid-1980s, and doesn't really work, not in real world conditions, which they have YET to even bother testing. It wouldn't be that hard, fire a ballistic missle towards the desert, unarmed, and try to shoot it down, without using transponders on the target, nor any other cheats. So far, even with transponders that give trajectory etc. they STILL fail to hit the damned things half the time, an unacceptable margin for failure. Not to mention the damned thing, even if we could get it to work, can be defeated too easily, for even if we were to overcome the technical obstacles, the system would be dependent on current technologies, chaff, dummy missles, etc. can all defeat the system, without dramatically increasing the cost for the country that develops such countermeasures.

Then again, this program is just a blank check for aerospace companies, no more, no less. The military is somewhat infamous for government waste, this is but one program where this is true. The Bradley fighting vehicle, which cost billions of dollars more than it was supposed to, was a deathtrap in its original design. What about the Osprey, the marine deathtrap, how many times MORE does it need to crash before its should be scrapped? Not to mention its vulnerabilities while transitioning from airplane to helicopter state, it never was practical for any type of combat conditions. Now its in full production, who knows how many more people will die from this thing, plus the investigation of falsifying mainenance records from the Marine's own squadron leaders.

It does no good to bankrupt the country to try to save it.

[cyberpj]

37. Is there film of this yet? When does BushCo do anything without PR? nt

[Up2Late]

41. Oh BS! Where's the evidence? Where's the proof other that this...

...LSoSs word that it happened?

Here's a link to the MDA's website, all I see is pictures of lunches, no actual intercepts are shown. And I only find ONE other "Hit to Kill" "Intercept" listed: <http://www.mda.mil/mdalink/html/mdalink.html>

And here a link to something I posted a few days ago, the GAO report that says the program is a mess: <http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2688944>

And check this out: <http://go.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=12632265&src=rss/topNews>

'OUR REALITY NOW'

...Obering's stated confidence contrasted with views of the Pentagon's own top weapons evaluator as well as those of many outside experts.

"As reported last year, there is insufficient evidence to support a confident assessment of limited defensive operations," David Duma, the Pentagon's director of operational testing and evaluation, wrote in an annual report to Congress on U.S. weapons dated February 1.

Obering said Duma's staff was coming at it "from a different perspective -- how can you break the system, what are the limits?"

(more at link)

[Matriot]

43. The test is a fake for more money

No missles are being moved in S. Korea unless they plan on equipping the carriers off the coast of N. Korea with the interceptor missle. What scares me is if we shoot and miss and it goes into another country. You think China is going to believe us if we say, don't worry it won't explode on impact if we miss.

We're being alerted for movement if N. Korea launches that missle.

[samsingh]

44. sure - it was probably on the ground with a beacon

shouting i am here.

[sweetheart]

45. And for the poor

Its really irrelevant, what the military does, except that it has squandered
our ability to care for our poor, by shooting it off in missile ranges.
What culture masturbates its good seed in to the sand, whilst its people suffer.