Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Incoming Missiles? Duck and Cover

By Stephen Pizzo, News for Real. Posted July 6, 2006.


Hours after North Korea pushed the launch buttons, our commander in chief still had only the foggiest idea what was heading our way.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Stephen Pizzo

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

I am not reassured.

First they said it was six.

No, cancel that, it was just three.

Hold it. The first report was correct, it was six.

Nix that. It was five.

OK, this time we've got it -- it was six after all.

Now it's seven.

The Russians and South Koreans say there were 10.

That was the -- dare I call it the Chinese fire drill -- that unfolded at the White House on the day North Korea shot a baker's half-dozen missiles in our general direction. Foxy Tony Snow really earned his money that day, running back and forth between the White House press room and the White House situation room, changing the number of missiles up, down, up, down and back up again all morning.

Hours after North Korea pushed the launch buttons, our U.S. commander in chief still had only the foggiest idea of what had been heading our way. Were they the big Taepodong Two intercontinental missles? Or were they shorter range Scuds? Or both? Or a combination of all the above? The Bush administration clearly did not know and didn't know for an unsettling amount of time.

Had this been the real thing, Hawaii might have been missing an island on Wednesday morning.

Of course the Pentagon was quick to reassure folks that they were ready, willing and able to shoot down an incoming Korean missile had it appeared to be heading our way. Which is, of course, utter nonsense -- and a barefaced lie.

The U.S. Missile Defense System (aka "Star Wars") has been controversial since Ronald Reagan dreamed it up nearly a quarter century ago. I have neither the desire nor energy to re-argue the case(s) for and against such a system. But, in light of this week's happenings, I am forced to wonder, what have they done with my $500 billion spent on it so far?

By this time, and with all that money, our commander in chief, whose command is required before interceptor missiles can be launched, still had less information during this crisis than CNN. Worse yet, CNN had better information.

So, 20 years and $500 billion later, here's what we have: If someone launches a missile attack with our address on it, we still cannot tell exactly how many missiles are heading our way or what kind of missiles they might be. All we know is something wicked our way comes -- maybe.

If you are inclined to find comfort in the Pentagon's post-launch chest thumping, you haven't been paying attention. Yes, it's true that President Bush has ordered a limited deployment of the first missile interceptors, based in California and Alaska. But be clear, those two Star Wars bases are to U.S. missile defense what the Potemkin Village is to North Korea. All show, no go.

In the past six years of flight tests, here is what the Pentagon's missile-defense agency has demonstrated: A missile can hit another missile in mid-air as long as (a) the operators know exactly where the target missile has come from and where it's going; (b) the target missile is flying at a slower-than-normal speed; (c) it's transmitting a special beam that exaggerates its radar signature, thus making it easier to track; (d) only one target missile has been launched; and (e) the "attack" happens in daylight. (Slate)

Digg!

Stephen Pizzo is the author of numerous books, including Inside Job: The Looting of America's Savings and Loans, which was nominated for a Pulitzer.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Do bigger fences make better neighbours?
Posted by: IanA on Jul 6, 2006 2:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When you see where the missiles flew and landed it is interesting to ask why Russia or China is not jumping up and down screaming like Japan or the US is. Perhaps the question is not how to build an impervious missile defence system, but how to remove the constant provocations of aggression and hegemony and make better neighbours.

When talking about these missiles no one in the media has mentioned the latest US/S. Korea/Japan war games in the west Pacific, the biggest ever. What is the “big deal” of these missiles compared to the threat of US global imperialism?

It is difficult to see under what conditions Americans can live at peace with the rest of the world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Yes, they do Posted by: brunowe
sickofsleaze
Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com on Jul 6, 2006 4:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am told how Reagan's pie in the sky Star Wars will protect us from incoming missles. My husband served in Nike Ajax and Nike Hercules missle batteries and I witnessed a training launch at the Fort Bliss missle range. The first requirement for shooting down a missle is "ya gotta find it first". From what I saw of the fiasco yesterday we couldn't find our butts if we had bleeding hemorrhoids

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: sickofsleaze Posted by: AlienSlave
» RE: sickofsleaze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
stuff wrong
Posted by: rsaxto on Jul 6, 2006 4:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Of course Bushcrap gets stuff wrong because he was born in foggy bottom.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: stuff wrong sickofsleaze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
THe threats are not Quite what is in this piece
Posted by: Jesse on Jul 6, 2006 6:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First, the missles N. Korea fired did not work. Rocket development takes a long time, especially when your suppliers are such paragons of quality control as Pakistan. Sorry, but the fact remains that there is a reason that, say, Israeli and Russian arms are popular in world markets and Pakistan's are not.

Second, the whole bit about ballistic missile defense gets caught up in whether it is possible or not. It is possible-- the patriot missiles that shot SCUDs down proved that anti-missile missiles are a possibility. It's an engineering problem, not one of fundamental physics. Laser beams are another issue--while that is also an engineering problem the issue there is getting enough energy to any missile for a long enough period of time to blow a hole in it. You can, in principle, build a powerful enough laser. The question is are you willing to spend a crapload of money it will take to get the energy source up there in orbit. Lasers are proposed in orbit because in anything but a vacuum they tend to disperse. Personal laser rifles a la science fiction movies, (assuming you'd be willing to carry a very heavy battery) around, would be pretty poor weapons on a foggy day.

So we can say that ballistic missile defense is possible. So what? The issue that comes up then is what happens when you deploy one. WHat nobody likes to admit is that if another country were to say they had one that anyone thought had a possibility of working, what would the US (or another nuclear state) be likely to do? One of two things:

a) Launch now. Before you are defenseless against a first strike
b) convert to a bomber-based force and submarines (you can't track subs very easily and the missile takes a lot less time to kill you)

Neither of these options is terribly good, though the second at leasts avoids suicide of the human race. But the second is not an option for Pakistan, or for any other nuclear state minus an up to date navy, which unfortunately describes a lot of newcomers to the club. (In fact, as far as I know, the US and Russia are the only two natins that have ballistic missile submarines handy or the capacity to build and launch long range bombers).

This says to me that deploying such a system is as suicidal as launching your missiles would be.

Right now the way it works is simple: you launch a nuke at anyone, you get nuked back. And whoever has the most wins. N. Korea is simply not a credible nuclear threat for any forseeable time frame. Fifty or a hundred nuclear warheads over Korea would render the whole place lifeless. We all like to assume the dear leader is crazy, but his actions over many years (including rising to the top of a byzantine political system) say to me that he is anything but--nor is he stupid.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Patriot missiles don't work Posted by: rightwing1
Stop flying over North Korea
Posted by: symcokid on Jul 6, 2006 6:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Perhaps if we stopped flying over North Korean airspace we could prevent a showdown - we should just quit provoking them. I think it's best we concentrate on our Nuclear partner, (Israel's) problems, and make sure that they submit to inspections - something that has never been done!!! Condor said, "we should keep the problems regional", right on - after we got the North Koreans all riled up. Don't we have plenty of crisis situations already? Maybe we should take a few more jabs at Iran while we're at it, getting involved in all other countries business that is!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Stop flying over North Korea sickofsleaze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
» RE: Stop flying over North Korea sickofsleaze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
The solution is quite simple.
Posted by: WhuThe?!? on Jul 6, 2006 7:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wonder if it has ever occurred to those who run the government that if we were nice to other countries, we wouldn't have to run around all paranoid about them shooting missiles at us and craving our destruction? Duh. It is really quite simple.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What we saw, realistically
Posted by: Rolomax on Jul 6, 2006 7:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What we saw was the media reporting an unimportant event.

"Uh oh. Somone who is not a US ally can launch a ballistic missle."

We've been hearing that since the 1950's. We're still here.

We just need new enemies in order to justify increasing the national debt.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What we saw, realistically Posted by: WhuThe?!?
Caught in the crosshairs
Posted by: macdon1 on Jul 6, 2006 7:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yep...it isn't nice to be sitting in Northern California knowing North Korea is working on a long range missle with the capacity to strike here. I know Bushco considers us "lefties" in California expendable but c'mon now George...isn't it about time you boys stopped aggrevating the whole world and tempting fate. If you get us wiped out, where ya gonna get your veggies from?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Caught in the crosshairs Posted by: rightwing1
Some things I've learned
Posted by: Ghoulman on Jul 6, 2006 7:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
North Korea's Kim Jong-il loves his toys, he's like a trekkie with a model starship when it comes to his missles. He pops 'em off all the time. No, none can reach the US, so no... not a concern.

Missile Defence, the new industry in Alaska and various other "red" states, simply doesn't work. You can't shoot down a bullet with another bullet. We simply do not have the technology. Sorry.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The "big hype" missile
Posted by: kungfoofighterx on Jul 6, 2006 7:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I feel like these are just scare tactics or some kind of North Korean silliness. The USA reasoning is that they saw more fuel near the rocket or missile or whatever it was; therefore it can reach the west coast. Was it just an analysts’ guess based on satellite photos? We have already seen how well USA analysts perform when asked about a county's weapons capability. Not so good. Clearly the missile didn’t get very far and probably never will. Maybe it was a North Korean hoax. They love that kind of stuff. Clearly its not a happy thought that North Korea can target its local neighborhood already with what ever kind mischief they have.
Didn’t we “realign” our forces away from the DMZ? But then again there is not much one can do against WMD except hope they miss or the thing wasn’t built correctly.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Technology before diplomacy . .
Posted by: FauxPorteno on Jul 6, 2006 7:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It never ceases to amaze! Rather than invest time and several thousand gallons of jet fuel to fly a rational human (note I said rational - Condie, you're out) over to try and work these things out diplomatically, we fall back on the GOD SCIENCE solution. As opposed to dealing with the subject on a humane level, we insist on confronting the symptoms of the problem rather than address the problem at its root.

You needn't be a world class shrink to see that Kim Jong-Il is crying out for attention from a nation that is in desperate need of international help. Is it so hard to imagine that he feels bullied and intimidated by this dangerous and bungling administration? If I were North Korea's leader, given Bush's penchant for "nation re-building", I might very well try and harness the power of the atom for my own self-preservation as well. It's pretty fucking hypocritical to lecture all these countries when the US is the only country to have actually dropped "the bomb", killing tens of thousands of Japanese. Am I the only one who finds it a little ironic that Japan is aligning itself with the country that actually bombed two of its major cities and occupies 2 countries as of the writing of this post, in hopes of finding a "peaceful" solution? BTW - when was the last time technology didn't create an entirely new set of problems and the need for ever more complex solutions? God help us!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hype and Bullshit
Posted by: sirossisofliver on Jul 6, 2006 8:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here's a thought......it goes something like this...

Could it be that the Mega-galactic NeoCon Military Industrial Complex has seen the writing on the wall?.....that their gig in Iraq has been milked for all (or substantially all) they can get?.....and they're collectively in need of another Techno-Specific infusion of Kazillions more tax dollars?

Hey!!!, I've got it!!....Let's resurrect the Glory Days of the Cold War, and ramp up 'Star Wars' again....it worked for St. Ronnie of Ray-Gun!!! Hell, we only got half a trillion dollars over the last 20 years....we can do better (ya know...'cause it still don't work, and never will)!

If only we could scare the shit outta the WalMart/NASCAR crowd before the November elections....especially with a brand-new threat from "the Godless Commie Zipper-Head Horde"....commin to defile yor Christian daughters....take away yor free-dums, and cut off yor mullets!)

Got your attention off of the rape/murdering, beer-swilling American military kid in Iraq....din't it?

Ya think?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If US invests less than 1% of the money to open North Korea, Problem solved.
Posted by: ecstatics on Jul 6, 2006 10:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well, I am an South Korean.
It might help you think differently if you get some talks from outsiders.

You guys know why North Korea launched the missiles.
As you know, they really want a direct talk with US and US knows this. However, US insists only a 6 party talk.

Why doesn't Bush accept direct talk option or choose both options: both 6 party talk and direct talk. Then, problem is solved again at least temperarily.

You know what,
Bush does not want to solve this problem. That is the problem.
If he does not want to solve this problem and the problems become more serious later, he may use more money from tax-payers to build better MD systems.

What is your choice?
1. Let NK develop better nukes and missiles to let you spend more money later?
2. Take an action now accepting the direct talk or both the direct and 6 party talks.
or
3. Invade NK as you have done to Iraq. I think Bush can lie anytime to do that. But I don't think he do this because there is no oil in NK.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What if Iraq had launched a few ballistic missles?
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Jul 6, 2006 10:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You can bet the US media and the Bush Administration would have said that this is "incontrovertible and damning evidence of a weapons of mass destruction program in the hands of an unstable leader with proven links to an international nuclear terrorism ring". Then we'd have heard long monologues on smoking guns and mushroom clouds - but not this time! Why not? North Korea's WMD program is a far greater threat then Iraqs ever was.

North Korea has no oil, and has a huge well-equipped army, and also has a lot people on the verge of starvation, though getting news out of that country is well-nigh impossible. US investment banks and financial institutions (the major contributers to GW Bush, well ahead of oil and energy donors) would see no economic benefit from a US invasion of North Korea.

It seems that the US media outlets just can't write stories about the economic reasons for invading and occupying Iraq - it would generate too much 'cognitive dissonance' in the general public.

International arms dealers, Saudi financial links, Pakistani nuclear scientists - you won't read about it in the US press, but see this article:

http://www.gregpalast.com/ north-koreas-missile-fired-by-kim-jong-il-built-by-team-bush

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ain't that the truth
Posted by: LMNOP on Jul 6, 2006 10:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"We can't do remarkable and important things any longer"

Ain't that the truth. What's worse, we can't even do ordinary things either like hold an honest election or respond to very real, very important and (probably) very preventable global climate threats.

Isn't incompetence one of two defining characteristics of American conservatism today, the other being sociopathic behavior (lying, stealing, murdering, oppressing)?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Ain't that the truth Posted by: LMNOP
GET BACK UNDER THOSE DESKS
Posted by: chanceny on Jul 6, 2006 2:34 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We might not have actually 'seen it coming' , but, didn't we SEE IT COMING? Didn't we, just last week, see pictures of their newest missle? I did - on Jon Stewart's show! He was making the jokes - you know, like he's wont to do! He was jokifying in front of a giant tv screen showing Lil Kim- N. Korean style - threatening everyone with his nefarious intentions and ominous looking fandangos. Scared me right under my desk, I tell ya!! $1/2 billion you say? Do we know how to throw around the moolah or don't we? We saved a tad on the bounty, still unpaid , for Bin Laden's captured head and we're saving tons of bread outsourcing, not reconstructing the gulf coast and cutting vital social programs in any way associated with The New Deal. Do you think there was such a belt-tightening when allocating more funds to our missle defense programs? Maybe that's why even tho we 'saw it coming', we didn't actually SEE IT COMING? But - at least we cudda had someone (preferably a neo-conartist chickenhawk) standing guard atop a mountainous range, looking upward, missle launcher in hand, at the ready to protect and defend our 'homeland's' security, no?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The real threat
Posted by: robmikejas on Jul 6, 2006 3:36 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Talk about Iran. Talk about N Korea. It is all meaningless in the context of the real threat. And that is the continued erosion of this country from within. George Bush has taken us to the brink of WW3 whether you see that fact or not. The rest of the world no longer respects or fears us. As a people, we have given in to all the Bush BS and fear mongering, leaving us plain folk looking like weakminded, fat assed, ineffectual pushovers. Our schools are in ruins, our kids are little freakoids, our leaders are criminals, our churches are indoctrination centers, our economy is sinking, our debt to the far east is insurmountable and our courage to stand up and insist upon and speak the truth has been sapped by all the negativity that permeates our very society. We are a weak country bearing no resembalence to The United Staes Of America as we once were. The real threat to us is that we will do nothing to turn this insanity around. Many are trying, but the majority rules.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The real threat Posted by: bttl
We can shoot down short range missiles
Posted by: tjohnson on Jul 6, 2006 4:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There were articles last week from the US and Japan that talked about the "joint" effort between Japan and the US to develop the Aegis Missile intercept system. I can not find the link at the moment, but I know someone working on this project in the Navy. They have had 6 out of 7 successful intercepts on short range missiles. Not perfect but better than nothing. The system is currently mounted on an aircraft carrier so it is mobile. I'll bet it's moving north from Hawaii now!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

clinker
Posted by: cottontail on Jul 6, 2006 9:41 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We have a hell of a lot more to fear from Dubya than from North Korea, Iran, Syria and whomever..........

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

5 year BMD window isn't worth 500 billion $
Posted by: jimlup on Jul 6, 2006 10:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The North Koreans do not have a credible threat. Though a BMD system could concievably work after another 100 billion $ or so it clearly isn't worth it.

When North Korea becomes a true threat with ICBM and nuclear weapons capablity they will be only a few years short of being able to easily overwhelm our Maginot line like BMD system.

I'd rather hedge my bets on diplomacy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

let's talk
Posted by: robchapman on Jul 8, 2006 10:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I woke up very this morning very distressed by GW's statements regarding the ABM system.
Without getting into a long exegesis, I can confidently say the ABM system will never work and Bush's saying that the US could have shot down North Korea's rocket is far more provocative and dangerous than the launch itself.
IF BUSH had any confidence in the anti-missile system he would be warning N. Korea that WE WILL SHOOT DOWN its next test-fire.
In order to counteract the President's war mongering, I am advocating a Peace Offensive," something that comes spontaneously from the populace, but that shows Bush, the GOP and all the other sundry war mongers that we have had enough.
The idea is to send a wreath to the Pentagon, I have considered asking that people places locks of hair, hair shorn from themselves, their pets and their children to show how many people will die if the GOP war mongers have their way.
Would you be willing to pass the idea of sending wreathes to the Pentagon along to your readers, it would probably be better if it could come at a particular day, like, perhaps the day commemorating the 61st anniversary of the immolation of Hiroshima, but we need to let the government know we are mad.
Bush is moving about the country now on his PR offensive, because it is summer and it will harder to mobilize against him.
WE MUST SHOW HIM THAT WE CAN MOBILIZE FOR PEACE AND COUNTER HIM EVEN DURING THE VACATION SEASON.

Robert Chapman
Lansing, New York
PACH12@TWVNY.RR.COM

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

coulio
Posted by: coulio on Nov 7, 2006 7:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
coulio
Posted by: coulio on Nov 7, 2006 7:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]