brian carroll on 17 Mar 2001 05:47:59 -0000

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

[Nettime-bold] Re: Armor, Amour

 regarding SDI and the US NMD, now the
 'missle defense', sans 'national' is
 that of a recent event in military
 cat and mouse in the realm of the
 pacific ocean...

 probably about a month ago now a
 series of military things were
 happening, between old foes Russia
 and the USA. i believe it was about
 the time that Putin's farse on the
 movement of nuclear weapons was
 caught on satellite imagery, that
 indeed nuclear missiles were where
 they were said not to be. and 3
 missiles went ballistic, testing
 the systems, and the psychologies
 of the cultural warriors, be they
 political-economists or social-
 in any case, nuclear bomber from
 Russia strategically buzzes nearby
 Alaska and causes a bit of a stir
 it the online press. said to be
 typical of old, cold war games...

 tied in with this, if memory serves
 correct regarding the technologies
 of National Missile Defense, is the
 test firing of rockets to test the
 system. a dummy rocket, the enemy
 missile, is fired, and the defense
 missile is fired, aiming for that
 'bullet hitting bullet' proposition
 that is missile defense. of the
 notable and seemingly predictable
 failures, one that stuck in my mind
 was of the failure of the defense
 missiles to deploy their second
 stages. or at least on some end
 of the attack/defend missile system
 these failures, if memory is nearby,
 were familiar with the testing of
 this system.

 cut to a few weeks ago. something
 weird in the pacific. somehow get
 word from a news article online that
 the US Haarp signals are going all
 day, something that has never before
 occured. i think it was at the 6MHz
 frequency, very very low (elf waves,
 i think). 

 HAARP, it has been said, is part of
 the SDI, or a result of its research.
 it is based in Alaska and is an array
 on ground based antennae which send
 a corkscrew of electromagnetic energy
 up in the atmosphere by alternating
 signals in the north-south and east-
 west directions. this energy pulse
 goes into the atmosphere, and, it
 is said, goes from roughly the North
 Pole to the South Pole and back in
 a mere 6 seconds or milliseconds, i
 forget. in any case, HAARP sends an
 electromagnetic dis/charge into the
 atmosphere. at the time this signal
 went on constantly, Russia was also
 testing its missiles.

 then, the commentator who was writing
 about this stated something about the
 National Missile Defense...

 it was noted that the effect of HAARP
 would be defensive, in that strategic
 nuclear weapons, fired from Russia
 or China, would need to exit the
 atmosphere and then re-enter the
 atmosphere to hit the US mainland.

 the HAARP signal, it was stated,
 would effectively be useful for
 sending a signal to jam the electronics
 needed for nuclear ballistic missile
 reentry, by not letting the rocket's
 stages separate, during reentry. it
 was noted that this was the same
 problem experienced in the NMD
 testing, that stages failed to
 separate/operate. thus, one theory
 was that HAARP was actually designed
 for a Nuclear Shield to stop the
 reentry of nuclear missiles and
 their payloads.

 the theory goes that HAARP may be
 the hidden defense in the strategic
 initiative that never was. and that,
 its weak point is from nearby missiles
 from submarines and from countries
 whom can launch missiles that do not
 go out of the atmosphere.

 the HAARP project, so the theory goes,
 would not be able to zap the electronics
 on these closer range missiles, that
 would likely come from a closer target,
 and thus a missile to missile, missile
 defense would be a solution, however
 technically-flawed, and psychologically
 reassuring, kind of like the Patriot
 phenomenon in the Gulf War. it may be
 a geopolitical trump card of war games
 until it is used and its vulnerability
 tested, and its omnipotence discredited.
 (not to metion the new laser weapons
 being deployed in .il as anti-missile
 defenses as being similiar/different).

 only a theory. think the link was on and there is a search
 function now, it was an offsite link.

 on a secondary note about nuclear war
 and war in general and related issues,
 i've found that an argument against
 drilling in the Alaska wildlife refuge
 for oil is again, like putting a big
 "HIT ME" sign up in the zone during
 times of war. put up a strategic
 petroleum installation in Alaska
 in a very fragile ecosystem and
 environment, with some of the only
 wild, wildlife left in the US, and
 the result in times of (nuclear) war
 will be to bomb the thing to nothingness
 including all the wildlife that the
 'environmentally friendly' oil drilling
 will, with a lot of heart, maintain.
 drilling in Alaska = bombs in Alaska,
 as a probability. any looking at the
 US pipeline maps for gas/oil and
 there is texas and alaska as big
 networks that feed the nation.
 blast those to hell and not much
 works. if they are in wildlife
 refuges, what's going to stop an
 adversary from blowing ecosystem
 to smithereens to win an argument?
 nothing, nothing will be left. just
 a thought. the above is not my opinion
 regarding HAARP, nor speculation. just
 a perspective that is usually not brought
 up in this regard, but the people who
 explore these systems also are talking
 about missile defenses in this regard.
 interesting. scary. bc

Nettime-bold mailing list