amra@ihuxj.UUCP (Steven L. Aldrich) (12/16/83)
I read three stories in the Dec. 12,83 Chicago Sun-Times that might
be worth discussing. One concerned the testing,later this month,of
the FIRST U.S. anti-satellite weapon system. The second was on the
deployment of SHOULDER LAUNCHED S.A.M. MISSILES around the White House.
The third article covered PENTAGON CONCERNS over the breakup of A.T.&T.
The story on A-SAT testingg stated that the weapon in question would
be launched from an F-15 at 80,000 ft. It would then climb into space
to impact with its target at 30,000 mph. The two stage missile has heat
seeking capabilities and small thrusters in the nose cone to guide it
to its intended target. It is scheduled for deployment in 1987. This
is just the FIRST system to be deployed in Reagan's current STAR WARS
defense program.
According to the story Reagan will likely approve an R & D effort
in this area that may cost $5-7 BILLION (yes BILLION) over 5 years.
The TOTAL COST of the STAR WARS programs could reach a cost of $500
BILLION. The R&D program is aimed at DEVELOPING LASER,PARTICLE BEAM,
and OTHER HIGH ENERGY WEAPONS to destroy Soviet NUCLEAR WEAPONS and
/or SATELLITES.
According to the ever popular UN-NAMED WHITE HOUSE SOURCE, Reagan
is committed (WHAT A LOVELY THOUGHT) to development of these weapons.
the source also states," WE'RE NOT SO AFRAID THEY (U.S.S.R.) WILL
DEPLOY EXOTIC DEVICES SOON THAT WILL BE EFFECTIVE. MAYBE WE'LL SEE A
SPACE BASED LASER SYSTEM,IN A FEW YEARS, THAT WILL BE MINIMUMLLY
CAPABLE OF DISABLING SATELLITES",he said,"BUT,IT WOULD BE FAR FROM
CAPABLE OF DESTROYING NUCLEAR WEAPONS".
When are the U.S. & U.S.S.R going to realize that militarizing(sp?)
space is not going to ease tensions on Earth. A program of JOINT
development of PEACEFULL uses of space resources might accomplish
this however. By developing the VAST RESOURCES on the MOON,ASTERIODS,
etc., we MIGHT begin to RESOLVE our GEO-POLITICAL problems without
ARMING OURSELVES TO THE TEETH. Both countries could reap untold
benfits; we must begin seeking and developing ways to PEACFULLY
CO-EXIST with the U.S.S.R BEFORE it's too late. This may be a good
first step towards achieving that goal.
Now on to the deployment of SAM missiles around the White House.
These SAM's are shoulder launched and would be under the control
of the Secret Service. They are being deployed,supposedly, to
defend the President from airial bombing by some crazed terrorist
on a Kamakazi(sp?) mission. According to the article, security
officers would have LESS THAN ONE MINUTE to decide to FIRE on a
plane,from the National Airport, if it deviated suspicialy from
its course.
This is the latest round if ever increasing protection of the
President from terrorism. Over the Thanksgiving weekend the White
House was blocked off and surrounded by trucks filled with sand
to prevent any CRAZED FIEND from driving a vehicle filled with
explosives into the White House. Since then, concrete barriers
have been installed to replace the trucks. All but two entrances
to the White House Gate have been sealed off. A twisting maze of
concrete barriers MUST be traversed to gain access at the two
entrance points still in operation.
Two questions came to mind when I read these stories. Firstly,
if they can DEFEND RONNIE (RAYGUNS) REAGAN FROM TRUCK BOMBS,
why do they claim there is NO DEFENCE AGAINST SIMILIAR ACTS IN
LEBANON? Secondly,is this a rel threat,(remember the LIBBYIAN
HIT SQUAD??), or is Ronnie R. over-emphasising the possibilites
of these types of attacks?
The story on the Pentagon raised some interesting,(scarry),points
about communications problems faced by the MILITARY AGENCIES who have
control over our STRATEGIC and CONVENTIONAL forces. According to the
article, the defense/military services utilize the BELL SYSTEM for
up to 95% of their communications needs. This includes the Washington
/Moscow HOTLINE, S.A.C., & NORAD (North American Aerospace Defence
Command). According to the story,S.A.C. relies TOTALLY on COMMERCIAL
TELE-COMMUNICATIONS RESOURSES fro its communication with the bomber
and missile forces under its control. With the BREAK-UP of the Bell
System,on Jan. 01,1984, Pentagon officials ARE CONCERNEDWITH THE CHAOS
THAT COULD RESULT IN AN EMERGENCY SITUATTION. Not to mention the
added costs ($1.3 BILLION) and delays involved with the INSTALLATION
and MAINTENANCE of COMMUNICATION LINKS. Not to worry though, they
have formed a committie ,of company representitves and govt. officials,
to resolve any difficulties in a NATIONAL EMERGENCY.
Anyone wishing to comment on the above issues can either POST to this
newsgroup or send me mail. (IHNP4!IHUXJ!AMRA)
PEACE & BEST WISHES
From the ever curious mind of:
Steve Aldrich (ihnp4!ihuxj!amra)renner@uiucdcs.UUCP (renner ) (12/18/83)
#R:ihuxj:-32600:uiucdcs:29200056:000:198
uiucdcs!renner Dec 17 11:05:00 1983
I really like the capitalized words. They make the article look like
the sort of thing one finds in National Enquirer. Of course, so does
the content.
Scott Renner
{ihnp4,pur-ee}!uiucdcs!renner tim@isrnix.UUCP (12/18/83)
#R:ihuxj:-32600:isrnix:11700013:000:1935 isrnix!tim Dec 17 10:33:00 1983 I am very concerned about the reports of shoulder launched SAM missiles on the White House grounds. I am concerned that it indicates a paranoid and unstable mentality-much like Nixon's during the Watergate investigation. Do we want a paranoid in the White House with his finger on the button? Rayguns is feeling very beleagured these days-but he loves it! Last week he gave the speech saying that "America would never be weak again!" and how the latest actions of the American military in Grenada, and Lebanon showed the American "standing tall". Since when were we ever "weak"? We have had the power to blow up the world for many years now--moreover we have military bases in more countries of the world than anyone else--our economy ,if not the overwhelming force in the world it once was, still outstrips the rest of the world by a longshot. Rather than being a sign of "strength", it seems to me invading a little country like Grenada is more like the "strength" of the bully who takes candy from a baby. Does it prove how "strong" he is, or how foolish and immature? When you have great power you must recognize your own strength and use it wisely. If somebody driving a 200 horsepower car acted as if they were merely riding a bike many people are likely to get hurt in the process. So it is with our incredible military might and our ability to blow up the planet--it is ridiculous to go throwing it around for no good reason. I am very concerned that Reagan thinks he's back on the set of some Hollywood Western or War movie--of course nobody really gets hurt in those, after it's over the actors all get up and dust themselves off. Unfortunately this is real life and if World War 3 starts there won't be anybody dusting themselves off for very long--just long enough to die of radiation poisoning,cold or starvation. (whichever gets them first) tim sevener Indiana University, Bloomington pur-ee!iuvax!isrnix
wetcw@pyuxa.UUCP (T C Wheeler) (12/19/83)
For the ever curious mind of Steve Aldrich. The shoulder launch missles you mention as being deployed around the White House were deployed 8 years ago just after the Navy(I believe) man landed a helicopter on the White House lawn. Don't put this one in Ronnie's pocket. These missles have been in place for a long time now, but the news that they were there has been a well kept secret.
andree@uokvax.UUCP (12/20/83)
#R:ihuxj:-32600:uokvax:5000046:000:732 uokvax!andree Dec 18 17:11:00 1983 Scott's right, it DID look like the National Enquirer. I don't know about all the content, but at least part of it had the same `ring of truth' that the NE has. The first test date for the F-15 ASAT weapon was announced about the same time as RR made his star wars speech. This weapon has been in development for several years; it is a response to the ASAT capabilites demonstrated by the soviets (You say you didn't know the russians had asat capability? Ask me for pointer. I'll reply, albeit slowly.) in the late 70's (may have been '80). The bit about the DOD depending on AT&T lines sounds equally bogus. However, I wouldn't put mediavel-style fortification of the white house past anybody who'd want to be president. <mike
jj@rabbit.UUCP (12/20/83)
Seems to me that a man who has been shot once, nearly shot at
twice, and been threatened many times may be something other
than paranoid when he defends his person.
It seems to me that people who say otherwise don't give
much of a damn about other people, rather they would
like to grind axes to a blunt point.
The vulnerability of ANY of the state buildings of the USA
is frightening, if you consider access by air. Perhaps
the public posting of SAM's isn't the most discrete way of
protecting the White House, Capitol, etc, but it is possibly
the most honest and most effective. <Its effectiveness depends
on the terrorists belief (or non-belief) of the missile threat.>
I think that the deliberate emotion-mongering criticism of
Reagan is nothing else but an attempt at political slander.
I think that articles of such a nature should appear in net.flame,
where they will be dealt with in a fashion befitting their nature.
And what's WRONG with a
"Drug store truck drivin' man"
<Who's NOT the head of the KKK.>
Joan, you were wrong on that one.
==============================
>From the torch of:
{ulysses,harpo,allegra,research}!rabbit!jj
<And, I'm generally CALLED jj, for those of you who can't
deal with machine names.>