America: World’s Leading Merchant of Death

image credit: REUTERS/Bob Strong

The Center for International Policy’s (CIP) Security Assistance Monitor (SAM) follows US foreign security aid and arms sales.

CIP “promotes cooperation, transparency, and accountability in US global relations.”

In a report titled “Trump Administration Makes Over $80 Billion in Major Arms Deals in First Year: Major Changes in Types of Weapons and Recipient Countries Compared to Obama Puts US Manufacturing Jobs and Human Rights at Risk,” it documented the following:

Trump administration 2017 arms sales totaled $82.2 billion – compared to $76.5 billion in 2016, less than record $102 billion total in 2010.

Top recipient countries last year include Saudi Arabia, Poland, Japan, Canada, Romania, Bahrain, Australia, Britain, UAE, Greece and Singapore.

Other significant foreign buyers included Iraq, New Zealand, Taiwan, Kuwait, Qatar, Israel, India and Kenya.

When Trump urges NATO countries to increase defense spending, he’s promoting arms sales for US producers – unrelated to protecting against threats. No foreign ones exist.

Missiles and bombs comprised the administration’s leading arms exports – compared to warplanes and helicopters under Obama.

About $659 million in weapons sales went to Saudi Arabia and UAE, largely for aggression in Yemen.

Around 25 countries made major arms purchases from America. The Trump administration proposed 16 major arms deals, involving their manufacture abroad – not a way to create “jobs, jobs, jobs” in America, as he claimed.

Sales are made without concern for human rights, America the world’s leading violator. Its key allies are notorious rogue states.

In January, the Trump administration approved a new arms transfer policy directive, streamlining approval of sales, eliminating what the National Security Council calls “unreasonable constraints on the ability of our companies to compete.”

According to an unnamed administration official, the Trump administration wants its “commercial and military attaches, unfettered to be salesmen for this stuff, to be promoters.”

The Commerce Department will be more involved in arms sales, reducing congressional ability to stop problematic deals.

The Trump administration wants unrestrained ability to sell arms to nations it wishes for any purposes, including for aggression against nations like Yemen and Syria, as well as repressing their own people.

Geopolitical considerations and profits matter more than human rights and adherence to rule of law principles.

US interests matter more than harm from US weapons sales to Saudi Arabia, Israel, and other rogue states.

The post America: World’s Leading Merchant of Death appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Weapons in Space Race Warfare

“The eyes of the world now look into space, to the moon and to the planets beyond, and we have vowed that we shall not see it governed by a hostile flag of conquest, but by a banner of freedom and peace. We have vowed that we shall not see space filled with weapons of mass destruction, but with instruments of knowledge and understanding…. I do not say the we should or will go unprotected against the hostile misuse of space any more than we go unprotected against the hostile use of land or sea, but I do say that space can be explored and mastered without feeding the fires of war, without repeating the mistakes that man has made in extending his writ around this globe of ours.” John F. Kennedy, speech at Rice University, 1962

Noble ideals from an era wide-eyed with optimism and aspirations. President Kennedy’s assassination ended the age of naivety. Space exploration was always about domination through military strength and maintaining the high ground. The United States over the last decades achieves what it does best; spend more money. The black budgets that are buried deep within the bowls of the Pentagon do not fund a utopia. The threat of warfare on some level never vanishes. The expanse into the universe just allows infinite space to move around the instruments for a clash of rivals. While Space Wars Will Look Nothing Like Star Wars, the prospects of attaining celestial peace are nothing but a pipe dream.

“There’s this idea connected with space that it should be used for peaceful purposes,” says P.J. Blount, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Luxembourg and the editor-in-chief of the Journal of Space Law. “And that idea extends a heightened status to space for states not to engage in these types of activities.”

That peaceful designation for outer space is based on the 1967 “Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies,” better known as the pithier “Outer Space Treaty.” It’s administered by the United Nations, and it states, among other things, that space is for peaceful uses only, and forbids placing weapons of mass destruction in orbit. It also forbids weapons of any sort on the moon. So far, the treaty has been upheld, in large part.”

REALLY ?

The record since the New Frontier details the same old adage since human nature does not change. No Treaty Will Stop Space Weapons, is inevitable.

“Space war concerns are turning toward the tactical. In a conventional shooting war, disabling U.S. sats blunts the precision weapons and navigation systems that enable the U.S. military to operate. You can see, then, why the Chinese and Russians are very interested in banning conventional weapons in space, but not so interested in banning weapons that could blind, kill, or disable satellites from Earth.”

This kind of thinking moves the debate into degrees and types of weapons that are now accepted as a given, especially since the ending of the cold war was just a temporary cooling of tensions. With the emergence of Red China into the supremacy race, the three way space weapons deployment chase heats up.

The U.S. military never misses an opportunity to pump up the fear factor to support the case for higher defense spending. CNBC gladly provides a forum to sell the Space arms race as Russia, China emerge as ‘rapidly growing threats’ to US.

“Navy Vice Admiral Charles Richard, deputy commander of U.S. Strategic Command, warned in a speech at a CSIS space security conference about offensive space capabilities and weapons being developed by China and Russia.

“While we’re not at war in space, I don’t think we can say we are exactly at peace either,” the admiral said. “With rapidly growing threats to our space systems, as well as the threat of a degraded space environment, we must prepare for a conflict that extends into space.”

The military-industrial-establishment eagerly pushes their agenda for spending The Air Force’s space budget is up by 8 percent, even though the service is cutting procurement of space systems by more than a billion dollars. In order to defend this increase the following argument attempts to rationalize Space Warfare: Why The U.S. Is So Vulnerable, Despite SpaceX’s Wins.

“Russia and China are ramping up their offensive potential. And while the effects of space warfare on worldwide commerce would hurt the U.S. and its adversaries alike, the U.S. military’s unmatched global footprint and forward-deployed posture mean it is especially dependent on space-based assets.

So what happens if China and Russia use their space assets on a commercial satellite? Is that an act of war?

“That is a policy issue that is being actively discussed,” said Stephen Flanagan, a senior political analyst at Rand Corp.”

Ramping up the implied danger, the Scientific American account of War in Space May Be Closer Than Ever points to the rapid development of operational systems for satellite warfare.

“The US declassified details of its secret Geosynchronous Space Situational Awareness Program (GSSAP), a planned set of four satellites capable of monitoring the Earth’s high orbits and even rendezvousing with other satellites to inspect them up-close. The first two GSSAP spacecraft launched into orbit in July 2014.

“This used to be a black program—something that didn’t even officially exist,” Weeden says. “It was declassified to basically send a message saying, ‘Hey, if you’re doing something funky in and around the geosynchronous belt, we’re going to see.’” An interloper into geosynchronous orbit need not be an explosives-tipped missile to be a security risk—even sidling up to an adversary’s strategic satellites is considered a threat. Which is one reason that potential U.S. adversaries might be alarmed by the rendezvous capabilities of GSSAP and of the U.S. Air Force’s highly maneuverable X-37B robotic space planes.”

Never let an arms race get into the way of lowering the volume and taking a second look at the cosmic advantages of cooperating in the vast voids of outer space. Oh no, that unprotected risk that President Kennedy spoke about has been pursued in the quest for continuous weapon development. According to the account, Space Weapons in Development there are at least three laser systems being developed for either space-based or ground-based weapons; hydrogen fluoride laser, deuterium fluoride laser and chemical oxygen iodine laser.

“The former U.S. Space Command, which is now part of the U.S. Strategic Command as of June 2002, doesn’t hide the fact that it wants to establish U.S. supremacy in space. In its Vision for 2020 report, the Space Command points out that military forces have always evolved to protect national interests, both military and economic. The report suggests that space weapons must be developed to protect U.S. satellites, and other space vehicles, as other countries develop the ability to launch spacecraft into space. In 1997, Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Space, Keith R. Hall, said, “With regard to space dominance, we have it, we like it and we’re going to keep it.”

Chronicles of modern warfare has shown that efforts to ban the weaponization of advanced levels of technological systems has been a failure since warmongering conflict just does not abide by the best of intentions. The long history of militarization of space is demonstrated by Space.com with their list of The Most Dangerous Space Weapons Ever.

Whatever category of cyber, kinetic or jamming weapons are on the horizon, the fact remains that the escalated space race is focused upon winning a warfare option. Well, none of us should be surprised. The planet is consumed with permanent war. The United States foreign policy establishment is scared about losing their empire. China wants to become the replacement imperium. And Russia is attempting to survive from the failures of their former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

Instead of trust and verify, the battle cry is to destroy and eliminate your advocacies. Each have different priorities and tactics on just how to reach their goal of preeminence. What can be derived with certainty is that any conflict in space would never be confined to the exosphere. The fallout, nuke or non-nuclear need not be pulled into the global atmosphere because there are ample earth bound weapons to destroy the entire planet.

Space may be the refugee for communication satellites and world commerce, but The Next Frontier: Trump and Space Weapons, cites an option for a space based offensive weapon.

“One idea that has kicked around for decades is a system that would consist of a tungsten projectile and a navigation system. Upon command, these ‘rods from God’ as they are poetically called would re-enter the Earth’s atmosphere and would strike a target, even one in a super hardened underground banker, at 36,000 feet per second, obliterating it.”

Somehow this just does not seem to be in keeping under a “banner of freedom and peace” or doing God’s work.

The post Weapons in Space Race Warfare appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Power In Military Black Budgets

The top five military contractors by sales are Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumann, General Dynamics and Raytheon. In addition to the Department of Defense allocations, the top five intelligence agencies that often provide military use applications are the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, the National Reconnaissance Office, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Program and the General Defense Intelligence Program. The actual amount of monies that go into funding off the books secret projects, estimated by Bill Sweetman as cited in the Economic Crisis and the Pentagon`s Black Budget, exceeds rational comprehension. “The Pentagon’s ‘black’ operations, including the intelligence budgets nested inside it, are roughly equal in magnitude to the entire defense budgets of the UK, France or Japan, and ten percent of the total.”

Even the Washington Post in the account, “Black Budget” details U.S. operations, goals reports the “Spending in the most recent cycle surpassed that amount based on the $52.6 billion detailed in documents obtained by The Post, plus a separate $23 billion devoted to intelligence programs that more directly support the U.S. military.” So where did this figure come from? None other than the audacious whistleblower or infamous traitor, depending on your viewpoint, revealed the figures. In the article, Snowden Reveals First Ever Public Disclosure Of Secret Black Budget Programs, the costs may be in the trillions.

“The Washington Post revealed that the “black-budget” documents report a staggering 52.6 billion dollars that was set aside for operations in the fiscal year 2013. Although it’s great to have this type of documentation in the public domain proving the existence of these black budget programs, the numbers seem to be off according to some statements made by some very prominent people who have been involved in the defense sector for years. There is a lot of evidence to suggest that these programs are not using billions of dollars, but trillions of dollars that are unaccounted for.”

Almost makes you believe that when Rumsfeld Says $2.3 Trillion Never Lost, Just Untracked, he might have actually been telling the truth for once.

See for Yourself: The Pentagon’s $51 Billion ‘Black’ Budget provides some astounding details of the way the “Black Operations” system works.

“The Pentagon likes to play a little hide and seek with its black budget. Projects with code names like the Navy’s “RETRACT JUNIPER” and “LINK PLUMERIA” are simple enough to find in the research development, testing and evaluation budget (.pdf). As are many of the Army’s “TRACTOR” projects: “TRACTOR NAIL,” “TRACTOR CAGE,” and so on. But then comes along a project like “TRACTOR DESK” hiding in one of the Army’s eight research budget documents, while others find their way to the operations and maintenance and procurement budgets.

These projects are also where to go when searching for what’s getting cut. Something called the “Classified Program USD(P),” formerly valued around a respectable $100 million, had its budget reduced to zero. “TRACTOR JUTE” is on life support and “COBRA JUDY” had the sting taken out of it.

Most other projects saw lesser cuts, however, and others like “RETRACT MAPLE” even saw minor gains. This is also while the researcher at Darpa only received a slight trim.”

Looks like the KISS (keep to simple, stupid) principle did not make it into the budget. Now take a high profile program that surely excites the imagination, even if it strains the pocketbook.

The Lockheed Martin SR-72 Specification & Technical Data, might just be another cover-up project designed to conceal the actual replacement for the SR-71 (Aurora) rumored to be flying for decades.

“The Lockheed Martin SR-72 is a conceptualized unmanned, hypersonic aircraft intended for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance proposed by Lockheed Martin to succeed the retired SR-71 Blackbird. The Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird has been overtaken by it’s successor, The SR-72, the fastest Aircraft ever built. According to Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works, the SR-72, has a twin-engine aircraft which is designed in such a way that it can fly at Mach 6. By 2018, the SR-72 could be up for demonstration showing off at the high-speed strike weapon (HSSW), a U.S. hypersonic missile program taking shape under the Air Force and Darpa.”

All these covert platforms are so secret that the complete disclosure is above the pay grade of most elected representatives. Breaking down the Black Budget alludes to the SAPS. Seemingly, a most appropriate slang name; – a fool, dupe – befitting government puppets.

“According to Ben Rich (Lockheed Skunk Works director 1975-1991), keeping programs secret can add anywhere from 10 to 15% to the overall cost . . . Within the murky world of secret defense projects there are three main categories: SAP’s (Special Access Program), USAP (Unacknowledged Special Access Program), and so called “Waived SAPS”. In the case of waived SAP’s, their existence is not known by Congress or possibly the President.”

So where does the money come from for the military to develop and build their play toys weapons of mass destruction? Catherine Austin Fitts, answers with the claim that:

“The black budget has numerous sources. First, there is funding allocated in secret by Congressional “oversight” committees. Second, there are funds clawed from other agency appropriations. Third there are an endless series of other sources of funding include seizures, proceeds from the marketing of hard narcotics and engineering of mortgage and other financial fraud in your community and from many other illicit businesses operated globally by the intelligence cartel. Finally, I suspect one of the largest sources and uses has become market manipulations through the Exchange Stabilization Fund.”

Somewhere along the way, genuine national defense is short-changed, even if one’s political views support the policy of imperium hegemony. The dominance of the military-industrial-complex comes not from their firepower systems, but from the ability to perpetuate a never-ending warfare society, based upon phony threats and a permanent aggressor interventionism and empire expansion.

The corporatists love this cash cow because killing fellow humans is the most profitable business in all of history. Keeping this fact hidden from the taxpayer is the ultimate black budget blueprint that needs protection for the Corporatocracy to continue.

The post Power In Military Black Budgets appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

DARPA Funds Technological Start-ups

The long tradition of government funding for technological development has been one of the most important aspects of creating the digital warfare battlefield. War is a primary endeavor of human behavior. The absence of peace on earth is a direct correlation from the curse of malicious human nature that pits competing sociopaths for dominance and world power. The race to invent, deploy and execute the destructive weapons of annihilation goes on with great enthusiasm as giant enterprises produce riches upon the ashes that their carnage implements. When it comes to funding the next innovation in military weapons, DARPA ranks at the head of the table of initiating the latest technology for mass murder.

The egg heads over at Wire never found an advanced technology that departs from the onward march towards progress, states in How to Get Startups in on the Military-Industrial Complex.

“Despite the pace of global technological change, the United States military-industrial complex may never be truly “disrupted.” We need it too much. We need a robust inventory of purely public defense platforms like warships, warplanes, and advanced munitions. And we need the defense base that can build them — that highly consolidated core of “traditional” prime contractors working within a system that has proven nearly impervious to smaller, more agile “non-traditional” companies, particularly those in Silicon Valley.

So what are the most significant barriers to entry for tech companies and how can they be lowered? How do companies in Silicon Valley view prospects for doing business with the federal government in the national security arena?”

Yep, the assumption that building a bigger and more efficient killing machine are a necessary price for maintaining military superiority translates into fostering both big and small tech company advancement. In order to keep this endless parade going, seed money for startups are built into the black budgets that go unaccounted for when public monies go missing. As Activist Post reports, $10 Trillion Missing From Pentagon And No One — Not Even The DoD — Knows Where It Is, “Even though audits of all federal agencies became mandatory in 1996, the Pentagon has apparently made itself an exception, and — fully 20 years later — stands obstinately orotund in never having complied.”

Citing numerous case studies as to the operations of the government funding process, Forbes looks at These DARPA Darlings Just Raised $20M To Build A Super-Powered Google For The Internet Of Things. Actual money amounts to fund such projects are concealed, while DARPA administrative functions often provide a disclosed linkage, the cash flow is seldom traced to its final offshore banking account.

This is not a cynical assessment, it is a factual conclusion based upon the enormous unaccountable monies that never seem to be significant enough for a serious Congressional investigation or a DOJ prosecution of wrongdoers. So the preposterous game goes on.

The history of creating the internet, contrary to Al Gore, has a long involvement from government funding. “DARPA or the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, hatched ARPANET, based on the networking technologies that provided the foundation for the internet.” So when such obscure companies as the 12 Early- And Mid-Stage Startups Backed By The CIA, Pentagon, And US Army, are dissected the average investor would have no familiarity with the companies.

1. Ayasdi


2. CounterTack


3. Anomali


4. Continuum Analytics


5. ProtectWise


6. Arctic Sand Technologies


7. Evolv Technology


8. Fuel3D


9. Phantom Cyber


10. Tribogenics


11. Algorithmia


12. Skincential Sciences

If direct DARPA involvement is absent in such startups, often university research is used to further the development. The obvious role of government subsidies to academia is ignored, but such funding is crucial to keep the military-industrial complex on the cutting edge of chaos.

Governments have always been in the business of securing the best instruments of war. However, in the cyber space of the mental illness to achieve oblivion, the development of DARPA Genetically Modified Humans for a Super Soldier Army, is beyond moral constraints. Paul A. Philips warns:

“The genetic modification of specific human genes will give these soldiers certain characteristics advantageous on the battlefield, giving rise to the most amazing abilities and performances.

Smarter, sharper, more focussed and more physically stronger than their enemy counterparts these soldiers will be capable of telepathy, run faster than Olympic champions, lift up record-breaking weights through the development of exoskeletons, re-grow limbs lost in combat, possess a super-strong immune system, go for days and days without food or sleep.

Then there’s the emotional side. These soldiers will have the empathy genes deleted and show no mercy, while devoid of fear.

Even more disturbingly, the “Human Assisted Neutral Devices program” involving brain controlling allows the ‘joystick’ remote operation of soldiers from some far away control centre.”

Creating a wired brain to take orders by remote control is a true gem of the descent into depravity. So when DARPA awards $65 million to develop the perfect, tiny two-way brain- computer interface, the future prospects of a zombie army is being funded with your tax dollars.

“The recipients have a lofty list of goals to aspire to. Foremost is DARPA’s desire to develop “high resolution” neural implants that record signals from as many as one million neurons at once. On top of that, it requests that the device be capable of two-way communication — receiving signals as well as transmitting them back out. And it wants that capability in a package no larger than two nickels stacked on top of one another.”

The full list of NESD grant recipients:

Paradromics, Inc. (Dr. Matthew Angle)

Brown University (Dr. Arto Nurmikko)

Columbia University (Dr. Ken Shepard)

Fondation Voir et Entendre (Dr. Jose-Alain Sahel and Dr. Serge Picaud)

John B. Pierce Laboratory (Dr. Vincent Pieribone)

University of California, Berkeley (Dr. Ehud Isacoff)

This is a far cry from the 12 Technological Advancements of World War I or the Top inventions and technical innovations of World War II. As DARPA proudly states, their 70 year history after the conclusion of WWII has been a mission of national security. Well, one need not be a Luddite to recognize that the MAD doctrine of mutual assured destruction expands to take into account the projects that DARPA nurtures and provides arsenals of cash to bring into development, borders on the theater of the absurd.

For advocates of the DARPA culture like Amanda Ziadeh, describes How DARPA creates and sustains innovation with defining their Vital Mission. “The opportunity to change the world by preventing or creating “a technological surprise” inspires the staff and encourages program managers to innovate for the future and security of the country. Projects that protect warfighters, citizens and the cyber infrastructure fuel the drive toward innovation.”

Their own web site boasts that DARPA’s success depends on the vibrant ecosystem of innovation within which the Agency operates, and is fueled by partners in multiple sectors. The hidden role of one such partner is described in a column that Israeli team to help put ‘disaster robots’ on their feet.

“The Robotics Challenge program is sponsored by DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), an agency of the United States Department of Defense responsible for the development of new technologies for use by the military. The Israeli team, Robil, is one of eleven that will develop software for the GFE Platform being developed by Boston Dynamics, Inc., based on its Atlas humanoid robot platform and modified to meet the needs of the DARPA Robotics Challenge. The team, the only non-American group invited to participate, was awarded $375,000 to develop the software over the next nine months.”

This is a trend discussed in Israel’s intelligence agency is going to start investing in high-tech startups.

“The Mossad funding is not a capital investment, and is equity free – meaning the Mossad just wants to be able to use the technology.  At the end of development, the Mossad will receive a non-exclusive license to use the intellectual property developed during the project.

The agreement with the Mossad does not confer any restrictions on the intellectual property, there is no need to pay royalties, and there are no other restrictions on the company.”

The natural inquiry would be to trace the connection between DARPA and all that lost secret defense monies and determine how much found its way into the coffers of the Mossad?

Financing all these technological ventures are a major departure from the function of a capitalistic marketplace. Indeed, those days are a mere myth of how innovation is now germinated. Government subsidies are the norm or more rightly described, are the primary way that technology is created for military applications.

DARPA may be viewed as an outstanding success for the imperial globalist cartel because the U.S. must be the enforcer of the transnational empire. Investing in such incubator projects comes with the blight of enhancing the weapons of worldwide enslavement. Crony relationships will tap into the money flow; but the technocrats, scientists and programmers bear a major responsibility for advancing the means of destroying the values of human dignity and societal civilization.

The post DARPA Funds Technological Start-ups appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Are We Really Capable of Shooting Down North Korean Missiles?

According to some analysts, Americans may be overly confident in our military’s ability to shoot down North Korean missiles if the country were to attempt to strike. Maybe the reason we haven’t shot down North Korea’s test missiles is that we can’t. While we all certainly hope that our military would be able to successfully defend the country against incoming missiles, we need to be prepared for any possibility.

According to an article by Joe Cirincione of Defense One, the reason we don’t shoot down North Korea’s missiles when they fire them over Japan is because…

We don’t have the capability.

Joe Cirincione is the president of Ploughshares Fund and the author of several books about nuclear weapons, including Nuclear Nightmares: Securing the World Before It Is Too Late.

According to Cirincione, when Japanese Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga said, “We didn’t intercept it because no damage to Japanese territory was expected,” this was only partially true. It wasn’t a threat, but they didn’t have the capability to shoot it down due to the altitude.

Neither Japan nor the United States could have intercepted the missile. None of the theater ballistic missile defense weapons in existence can reach that high. It is hundreds of kilometers too high for the Aegis interceptors deployed on Navy ships off Japan. Even higher for the THAAD systems in South Korea and Guam. Way too high for the Patriot systems in Japan, which engage largely within the atmosphere.

All of these are basically designed to hit a missile in the post-mid-course or terminal phase, when it is on its way down, coming more or less straight at the defending system. Patriot is meant to protect relatively small areas such as ports or air bases; THAADdefends a larger area; the advanced Aegis system theoretically could defend thousands of square kilometers. (source)

Well, that’s unsettling. So, what if we engaged the missile before it reached that high?

Cirincione says that too is unlikely to be successful.

There is almost no chance of hitting a North Korean missile on its way up unless an Aegis ship was deployed very close to the launch point, perhaps in North Korean waters. Even then, it would have to chase the missile, a race it is unlikely to win. In the only one or two minutes of warning time any system would have, the probability of a successful engagement drops close to zero. (source)

But don’t take Cirincione’s word for it. In his article, he cited other experts who echo his sentiments.  Jonathon McDowell. an astronomer at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, tweeted in response to someone questioning why we didn’t shoot down NK’s missiles:

As well, he quoted Jerry Doyle, deputy business editor for Asia at The New York Times:

“It’s actually virtually impossible to shoot down a missile on the way up. Midcourse or terminal are the only places you have a shot.” (source)

While I’m not sure how a business editor has special knowledge of our nuclear defense system, all of these sentiments certainly raise the question:

IF WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO SHOOT DOWN NORTH KOREAN MISSILES, WHY HAVEN’T WE DONE SO?

If we attempted to shoot down a North Korean missile and missed, it would be a major propaganda coup for Kim Jong Un.

When our military practiced this, they managed to shoot down 2 out of 3 missiles.

A lot of people are putting a great deal of hope in American missile defense systems, but it’s important to note that a couple of weeks ago in a test over the Pacific, our defense system failed. This was subsequent to a previous success.

A medium-range ballistic missile was launched from a test range in Hawaii at 7:20 pm local time, but the interceptor missile fired at sea from USS John Paul Jones, a guided-missile destroyer, missed the target.

“A planned intercept was not achieved,” the statement said. (source)

That’s disconcerting. After the failed test, there was a third test which was successful, but it’s very important to realize that our military isn’t infallible. If our rate is 2 out of 3 missiles shot down, that means that 1 out of 3 still gets through and wreaks destruction.

So, could we actually shoot down a missile “gift package” as Kim Jong Un creepily calls it?

The unsettling answer is, maybe.

Maybe, if we were expecting it, if the conditions were right, if we were close enough, if it was low enough, if we were in a perfect position.

There are way too many “ifs” in there for me to feel fully confident in our ability to shoot down North Korean missiles before they strike the mainland, which experts now believe they have the ability to reach. We also know that North Korea also possesses the ability to create hydrogen bombs. And as I’ve written before, if you believe this is all a big set up for a false flag event, that would hardly matter to those nearby if such a thing were to happen.

If you aren’t prepped for the potential of a nuclear strike, it’s time to start learning what you need to do. (This article and this class can help you.) It’s essential to remember that in the event of a nuclear strike, if you aren’t at Ground Zero, there is an excellent chance you will survive if you are prepared with information and the right supplies. And if you know what to do, you can survive without the aftereffects of radiation.

Hat tip to my friend Pete for this story

Create your own review

Average rating:  

 0 reviews

U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis Weighs Using “Kinetic Weapon” On North Korea

By: Aaron Kesel, Activist Post | 

U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis hinted at using a kinetic weapon on Tuesday while discussing tensions with North Korea when he made a Freudian slip.

Mattis was asked whether there was “any military option the US can take with North Korea that would not put Seoul at grave risk,” Mattis responded, “Yes, there are, but I will not go into details.”

Later during the press conference, another reporter questioned Mattis and caught him off-guard:

“Just to clarify, you said that there were possible military options that would not create a grave risk to Seoul,” a reporter asked. “Are we talking kinetic options as well?”

“Yes, I don’t want to go into that,” Mattis responded.

Previously, Mattis stated that a war with North Korea would “involve the massive shelling of an ally’s capital, (South Korea) which is one of the most densely packed cities on earth.”

U.S. President Donald Trump in a speech to the United Nations on Tuesday threatened to “totally destroy North Korea” if Pyongyang didn’t quit its nuclear testing and threats.

This also comes after the U.S. and South Korea wrapped up its annual military drill harassing of North Korea, reminding the dictatorship of its military presence at its southern border.

In 2015, the U.S. Air Force confirmed that military contractor Boeing has an electromagnetic pulse weapon, which is capable of targeting and destroying electrical systems without the collateral damage of killing people. It’s essentially an EMP that takes out the power grid of a given area.

The project is known as the “CHAMP,” or Counter-electronics High-powered Microwave Advanced Missile Project, and it already has been operational since 2015, according to Air Force Research Laboratory commander Major General Tom Masiello.

In January, Trump’s Air Force chief of staff revealed to USA TODAY that the U.S. President could use “space weapons against ISIS.”

“If we want to be more agile than the reality is we are going to have to push decision authority down to some lower levels in certain areas the big question that we’ve got to wrestle with … is the authorities to operate in cyber and space,” General David Goldfein, the Air Force chief of staff, told USA TODAY.

However, the U.S. also has other kinetic weapons in its arsenal that would allow Trump to “totally destroy North Korea” — one of weapons system is the “Rods from God.”

What is the Rods from God? The “Rods from God” is a part of the directed energy weapon family; it’s a kinetic energy weapon.

The rods are directed munitions, the higher you are (the greater your distance from the planet), the greater the kinetic energy you have.

In 2004, published in Popular Science, Eric Adams writes:

A pair of satellites orbiting several hundred miles above the Earth would serve as a weapons system. One functions as the targeting and communications platform while the other carries numerous tungsten rods–up to 20 feet in length and a foot in diameter–that it can drop on targets with less than 15 minutes’ notice. When instructed from the ground, the targeting satellite commands its partner to drop one of its darts. The guided rods enter the atmosphere, protected by a thermal coating, traveling at 36,000 feet per second–comparable to the speed of a meteor. The result: complete devastation of the target, even if it’s buried deep underground. The two-platform configuration permits the weapon to be “reloaded” by just launching a new set of rods, rather than replacing the entire system.

The concept of developing kinetic energy weapons has been around since the 1950s when the RAND Corporation proposed placing rods on tips of ICBMs, although the Pentagon won’t say how far along the research is, or even confirm that any efforts exist, citing those details as classified. The “U.S. Air Force Transformation Flight Plan,” published by the Air Force in November 2003, references “hypervelocity rod bundles” in its outline of future space-based weapons; and, in 2002, another report from RAND, “Space Weapons, Earth Wars,” talks about the effectiveness of such a weapon.

A space weapons agreement was proposed by Rep Dennis Kucinich called the “Space Preservation Treaty”  in 2005 which states that countries won’t seek to weaponize space. However, that bill never made it past the introduction stage. Another House of Representatives bill known as the H.R.2977 “Space Preservation Act” was proposed in 2001 to ban the use of “exotic weapons” listing the following:

(B) Such terms include exotic weapons systems such as —  (i) electronic, psychotronic, or information weapons; (ii) chemtrails; (iii) high altitude ultra low frequency weapons systems; (iv) plasma, electromagnetic, sonic, or ultrasonic weapons; (v) laser weapons systems; (vi) strategic, theater, tactical, or extraterrestrial weapons; and (vii) chemical, biological, environmental, climate, or tectonic weapons.

Obama violated this agreement under the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act before leaving office, and no one noticed that the legislation he signed is essentially the Star Wars Defense Initiative II that his predecessor, Ronald Reagan, signed calling for a space-based missile system.

---

Aaron Kesel writes for Activist Post and is Director of Content for Coinivore. Follow Aaron at Twitter and Steemit.

Image Credit

Create your own review

Average rating:  

 0 reviews

A North Korean H-Bomb? Another Nuclear Test?

Pyongyang claimed it developed a hydrogen bomb miniaturized enough to fit atop a ballistic missile, according to its KCNA news agency.

Kim Jong-un was quoted saying his country has a “thermonuclear weapon with super explosive power made by our own efforts and technology. All components of the H-bomb were 100 per cent domestically made.”

KCNA said the DPRK “further upgraded its technical performance at a higher ultra-modern level on the basis of precious successes made in the first H-bomb test.”

After the January 2016 test, scientists said the six-kiloton yield was too low for a thermonuclear bomb. Its September 2016 test reportedly had a 10-kiloton yield.

The Hiroshima bomb was a 15-kiloton device. America’s first successful H-bomb test in 1952 produced a yield exceeding 10 megatons, the equivalent of 10 million tons of TNT – 500 times more powerful than the Nagasaki bomb.

It’s unknown if DPRK technology advanced this far. It likely will eventually, given its determination to develop the most powerful weapons possible – its most effective way to deter feared US aggression.

Post-WW II history shows America only attacked nations without its super-weapon capability. North Korea has A-bombs. If able to mount them atop ballistic missiles, it potentially can deliver a robust response to US aggression – against its regional forces in South Korea and Japan.

Last Sunday, a 6.3-magnitude tremor was registered in DPRK territory. It’s unclear if it was an earthquake or nuclear detonation.

South Korean intelligence earlier said Pyongyang completed preparations for a nuclear test at its Punggye-ri site in the country’s northeast.

Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Kono said his government determined that a nuclear device was tested, the DPRK’s sixth since 2006, the first one since September 2016.

South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff called Sunday’s seismic event “artificial.” A 4.6-magnitude tremor followed the first one. China said a “cave-in” could have caused it.

Beijing’s earthquake networks center said a nuclear explosion might have caused the initial seismic event.

South Korean Nuclear Engineering Professor Kune Suh said “(t)he power (of Sunday’s event was) 10 or 20 times or even more than previous ones.”

Japan’s meteorology agency called Sunday’s tremors at least 10 times more powerful than earlier ones. Seoul placed its military on high alert.

Japan’s Foreign Minister Kono said “(a)ll options are on the table.” Trump didn’t immediately comment.

US nuclear expert Jeffrey Lewis called Sunday’s event “big, an order of magnitude bigger than anything else we’ve seen the North Koreans explode. (Its leadership) want(s) an arsenal as modern as anyone else.”

Sunday’s event occurred as a BRICS three-day summit began in China. Pyongyang said it won’t halt development of its nuclear and ballistic programs as long as US hostility persists.

Create your own review

Average rating:  

 0 reviews

Robocop Reality: Massive Military Drones Could Start Replacing Police Helicopters

By: The Anti-Media | 

According to the defense contractor that developed the Predator and Reaper drones for the United States military’s operations in the Middle East, drones will have begun to replace piloted law enforcement helicopters by the year 2025.

On Monday, it was reported that the contractor, General Atomics (GA), is pressing hard for the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) to change its regulations on unmanned flight over American soil.

“The federal rules that govern aircraft in U.S. airspace are much stricter than those that cover U.S. military drones overseas,” Defense One wrote. “Many of the Federal Aviation Authority’s regulations were drafted for manned aircraft, long before unmanned flight across the United States was even a possibility.”

As such, defense contractors have a vested interest in seeing the FAA adopt regulations that, as Defense One reports, would “open the floodgates” on a brand new aviation market. But GA, which has developed a cousin of its Reaper drone for domestic surveillance use, is ahead of the pack in terms of FAA certification.

In August, after receiving a special waiver from the FAA, GA put on a demonstration of its new MQ-9B drone, flying it 275 miles from Yuma, Arizona, to GA’s private airfield in Grey Butte, California. During the demo, members of the media, including Defense One’s Patrick Tucker, got to see what the machine is capable of:

“During the MQ-9B test in Grey Butte, journalists peeked out the door of the ground-control trailer to the tiny, barely visible plane overhead. Back inside, the monitors showed that we could easily distinguish each another, pick out clothing patterns, discern other markings, etc. It looked like a view from 30 feet up, not 2,000.”

GA is aiming for FAA certification of its MQ-9B by 2025. If the contractor has its way, the door will officially be open for military-style unmanned craft to be used by police departments across the country.

Naturally, the possibility has privacy advocates greatly concerned, as it has since its injection into the public conversation. This concern was voiced once more by Jeramie D. Scott, director of the Domestic Surveillance Center Project at the Electronic Privacy Information Center, to Defense One when speaking of the MQ-9B:

“Drones make indiscriminate and persistent aerial surveillance feasible and can easily be equipped with technologies like facial recognition. Without proper restrictions, drone surveillance will become the norm of public space, undermine our constitutional rights and chill First Amendment activities.”

Create your own review

Average rating:  

 0 reviews

Latest North Korean Missile Test

[image: cnn.com]

For the first time since 2009, North Korea test-fired an intermediate-range ballistic missile over Japan – likely in response to provocative US/South Korean military exercises (and US/Japanese ones) the DPRK believes are preparations for war.

Reportedly the missile flew around 2,700 km, reaching a maximum height of 550 km over Japan before breaking up and falling harmlessly into waters around 1,180 km east of Hokkaido.

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said he’ll “demand convening an emergency (Security Council) meeting.” Washington and South Korea also called for one.

Hours after the test, South Korean war planes conducted a provocative bombing drill, President Moon Jae-in’s press secretary saying it was ordered as the nation’s security council discussed possible counter-measures against the DPRK.

South Korean Foreign Minister Kang Kyung-wha and Rex Tillerson discussed imposing additional sanctions on Pyongyang.

A Tuesday Security Council meeting is planned. Whether China and Russia will agree to further tough sanctions is unknown.

They’re ineffective in halting Pyongyang’s development of a deterrent against feared US aggression – the reason for its nuclear and ballistic missile programs, for defense, not offense.

Beijing and Moscow support a “double freeze (dual suspension)” – Pyongyang agreeing to suspend further ballistic missile tests along with Washington, South Korea and Japan halting joint military exercise, a proposal the Trump administration rejects, continuing heightened tensions instead of cooling things down as a first step toward ending brinksmanship on the Korean peninsula.

Tuesday’s test followed three short-range missiles test-fired on Saturday – two traveling about 250 km before splashing down in the Sea of Japan harmlessly, the third reportedly exploding shortly after launch.

China prioritizes peace and stability on the Korean peninsula. Washington’s rage for endless conflicts makes war possible, resolving nothing, risking the lives and welfare of millions of North and South Koreans if launched, Japanese ones as well.

On Tuesday, South Korea’s Yonhap news agency said Moon’s government was considering deployment of strategic defense equipment in response to Pyongyang’s latest test, along with possible other response options.

South Korean Defense Minister Song Young-moo left for Washington to meet with James Mattis, HR McMaster and top US Pentagon officials, saying:

“I will discuss prospects of reacting (to the DPRK missile tests) with the US Secretary of Defense and US National Security Adviser in the White House.”

Separate South Korean meetings will be held with US Pacific Command head Admiral Harry Harris and US Pacific Fleet commander Admiral Scott Swift.

China’s Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying warned that things are “at a tipping point approaching a crisis. At the same time there is an opportunity to reopen peace talks.”

North Korean missile and other tests are for military readiness. They’d be unnecessary if Washington engaged in responsible diplomacy with the DPRK instead of continuing decades of hostility.

America is to blame for brinksmanship on the Korean peninsula, not Pyongyang. Resolution is unattainable as long as US imperial aims remain unchanged.

Create your own review

Average rating:  

 0 reviews

Discounting North Korea’s ICBM Capability

[image: Reuters/KCNA]Based on its ballistic missile tests so far, including its most recent ones last month, Russia believes the DPRK hasn’t yet achieved ICBM capability.

Noted ballistic missile/rocket expert Theodore Postol partly agrees, along with German rocket experts Markus Schiller and Robert Schmucker.

In an analysis for the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, they called Pyongyang’s Hwasong-14 ballistic missile, tested twice in July “a ‘sub-level’ ICBM that will not be able to deliver nuclear warheads to the continental United States.”

“Our analysis shows that the current variant of the Hwasong-14 may not even be capable of delivering a first-generation nuclear warhead to Anchorage, Alaska, although such a possibility cannot be categorically ruled out.”

“But even if North Korea is now capable of fabricating a relatively light-weight, ‘miniaturized’ atomic bomb that can survive the extreme reentry environments of long-range rocket delivery, it will, with certainty, not be able to deliver such an atomic bomb to the lower 48 states of the United States with the rocket tested on July 3 and July 28.”

Postal, Schiller and Schmucker called the DPRK’s July tests “a carefully choreographed deception…to create a false impression that the Hwasong-14 is a near-ICBM that poses a nuclear threat to the continental US.”

While it’s unable to manufacture sophisticated rocket components so far, the skill and ingenuity of its scientists in using Soviet Russia-era rocket motor components “has grown very substantially,” they said.

The July tests carried reduced payloads – able to reach a much higher altitude than possible if carrying a nuclear warhead and protective heat shield.

Pyongyang achieved its objective, creating the false impression of being able to strike US territory – what it’s unable to do based on the authors’ analysis.

Yet technological progress it’s made indicates it’s heading toward eventually achieving what it can’t now accomplish.

The authors cautioned that no one outside North Korea has reliable information on the characteristics of its nuclear weapons designs – including whether miniaturization was achieved to permit their mounting on a ballistic missile, despite suggestions otherwise.

According to the authors, we’re “left to speculate (on Pyongyang’s nuclear expertise) based on intelligence information that we have from other sources and on an understanding of the very significant technical problems of design and implementation that must be solved to be able to build and deliver atomic bombs by ICBM.”

Based on available information, they estimate Pyongyang could only deliver a nuclear warhead as far as Anchorage, Alaska weighing 500 – 550 kg.

To reach Seattle, it could weigh no more than 300 kg. They believe “an advanced North Korean weaponized atomic bomb would be unlikely to weigh less than 500 to 600 kilograms.”

“So it is entirely possible that this variant of the Hwasong-14 (tested in July) will not be able to deliver an atomic bomb to Anchorage, Alaska,” they said.

If the Hwasong-14 upper stage was “fitted with the more capable vernier motors from the SS-N-6 submarine launched ballistic missile (known in Russia as the R-27), it could potentially deliver an atomic bomb to Anchorage, if the bomb weighed less than between 650 and 750 kg,” according to the authors.

“The same upgraded variant of the Hwasong-14 could only deliver an atomic bomb to Seattle if the bomb weighed less than between 400 and 450 kg,” they added.

Regardless of current or likely more advanced DPRK capability later on, the nation’s history shows it threatens no other nations.

Its nuclear and ballistic missile weapons are solely for defense – deterrents against feared US aggression.

The real menace lies in Washington, not Pyongyang.

How Much of a Nuclear Threat is North Korea Really?

We all like to scoff at that crazy little dictator, Kim Jong Un, who is a walking caricature, putting himself on the cover of a magazine as the sexiest man alive and talking smack like a WWF champ. But, in all seriousness, is North Korea actually a threat?

Unfortunately, it looks like the answer to that question is yes…and they’re turning into a bigger one each year.

Despite the buffoonery of their Dear Leader, the threat of North Korea is growing rapidly, according to the US Intelligence community. When prepping for a nuclear strike becomes the officially recommended course of action, it is time to pay attention.

(What you do in the minutes after a detonation could save your life. Learn what to do in the event of a nuclear strike here.)

They have successfully tested an ICBM that could carry a nuke.

The US military Defense Intelligence Agency says that by sometime in 2018, North Korea could have an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) with the ability to transport a nuclear warhead.

They’re basing this on a recent successful test of such an ICBM.

“This test, and its impact on our assessments, highlight the threat that North Korea’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs pose to the United States, to our allies in the region, and to the whole world,” the DNI’s National Intelligence Manager for East Asia, Scott Bray, told CBS News on Tuesday, adding that the U.S. intelligence community was “closely monitoring the expanding threat from North Korea.” (source)

Currently, Alaska, part of Canada, and Hawaii are within range.

Right now, experts don’t believe that North Korea could transport a nuclear warhead to the US mainland, however, Alaska and Hawaii are at risk. Hawaii would be a particularly valuable target, as it is the home of the US Pacific Command.

This image shows the current reach of different missiles that we know they possess.

Image Credit

However, they’re making rapid progress, and experts believe that by sometime in 2018, they’ll have the capability of striking the West Coast, with its large population centers in Seattle, Los Angeles, Portland, and San Francisco.

The US State Department has advised American citizens against visiting North Korea.

In the immortal words of my daughters in their pre-teen years, “Duh.”

Although I personally can’t understand why anyone would want to travel to North Korea, especially after what happened to that poor young man, Otto Warmbier, it appears that thousands of people vacation there every year. 95% of the visitors are from China and about 75% of the visitors are male. About 800 Americans per year make the trip.

Recently, the State Department issued a travel warning:

The Department of State strongly warns U.S. citizens not to travel to North Korea/the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK). The Department of State strongly warns U.S. citizens not to travel to North Korea/the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK). U.S. citizens in the DPRK are at serious risk of arrest and long-term detention under North Korea’s system of law enforcement. This system imposes unduly harsh sentences for actions that would not be considered crimes in the United States and threatens U.S. citizen detainees with being treated in accordance with “wartime law of the DPRK.” Since the United States does not maintain diplomatic or consular relations with North Korea, the U.S. government has no means to provide normal consular services to U.S. citizens in North Korea. This notice updates the number of U.S. citizens who have been detained in North Korea and replaces the Travel Warning dated February 7, 2017. (source)

Being part of an official tour won’t help Americans if they are found with anything in their possession that is critical of North Korea, and there is no consulate there to rescue you. Some of the things that are illegal in North Korea and punishable by labor camps or death are:

• Showing disrespect to the country’s former leaders, Kim Il Sung or Kim Jong Il, or for the country’s current leader, Kim Jong Un, including but not limited to tampering with or mishandling materials bearing their names or images;


• Entering North Korea without proper travel documentation;


• Possessing material that is in any way critical of the DPRK government;


• Proselytizing or carrying out religious activities, including activities that may be construed as such, like leaving behind religious materials;


• Engaging in unsanctioned political activities;


• Traveling without authorization, even for short distances;


• Having unauthorized interaction with the local population;


• Exchanging currency with an unauthorized vendor;


• Taking unauthorized photographs;


• Bringing pornography into the country;


• Shopping at stores not designated for foreigners; and


• Removing or tampering with political slogans and signs or pictures of political leaders.

(source)

Personally, I’d rather go just about anywhere on the planet than North Korea, but that’s just me.

What preparations are being made for a potential attack?

When prepping becomes official, it’s time to pay attention.

First, the US recently tested defense technology and successfully shot down a simulated, incoming intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) similar to the ones used by North Korea. The simulation took place over the Pacific Ocean in July:

The test was the first-ever of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system against an incoming IRBM, which experts say is a faster and more difficult target to hit than shorter-range missiles.

The US Missile Defense Agency said the IRBM was designed to behave similarly to the kinds of missiles that could threaten the US.

“The successful demonstration of THAAD against an IRBM-range missile threat bolsters the country’s defensive capability against developing missile threats in North Korea and other countries,” the Missile Defense Agency said in a statement. (source)

Finding themselves particularly in the crosshairs of North Korea, Hawaii has been openly working to prepare citizens for the potential of an attack. They’ll be testing an attack warning system in November.

A “guidance summary” from the Hawaii Emergency Management Agency says residents will be alerted of nuclear detonation through siren alarms and flashing white lights. An Emergency Alert System will broadcast over television and radio frequencies as well. (source)

The state has released official guidelines on surviving a potential nuclear attack. (This is useful information no matter where you live.)

Matthew LoPresti, a legislator in Hawaii has been a strong advocate of the preparations.

“People think everybody would perish, but that is not the case. It would be a mass casualty event, but most people would survive. If you don’t take steps, more people will lose their lives.” (source)

A dear friend of mine living in Hawaii recently attended a public meeting informing citizens about getting prepared for the potential of an attack. Citizens were told that an official response could take a while, and to plan to be completely on their own for up to a month. (Gosh, sounds familiar, right?) These meetings have been taking place all over the state as the local government urges residents to be prepared for a disaster, a shut-down of services, and a complete halt to any merchandise of food being shipped into the islands.

They aren’t the only ones preparing. Los Angeles California is also making preparations for the potential of an attack, even though the technology is not expected to be advanced enough to reach them right now.

Fleets of big black trucks, harbor boats and aircraft, equipped with radiation sensors and operated by specially trained law enforcement teams, are ready to swing into action in Los Angeles for a catastrophe that nobody even wants to think about: a North Korean nuclear attack…

“We monitor events all over the world and assess whether there is something that could impact us here,” said Capt. Leonard McCray, commander of the emergency operations bureau at the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department. “North Korea is clearly one of them.”

As tension rises, the inevitable question is: How well prepared are Los Angeles and other U.S. cities for a nuclear strike? The answer is somewhat unexpected. After two decades of fighting terrorism, law enforcement agencies and the federal government today are better equipped and trained to handle the aftermath of a limited nuclear attack than they ever were during the Cold War. Yet generations of Americans have grown up without learning how to protect themselves in the aftermath of a detonation. (source)

Unsurprisingly, some people object to preparing citizens for a nuclear attack.

There are several reasons that some squeaky wheels object to these wise preparations.

David Wright, a weapons expert at the Union of Concerned Scientists, says that civil defense preparations are sending the wrong message to Kim Jong Un. And Jeffrey Lewis, a nuclear weapons analyst with the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies in Monterey, Calif., thinks that the Venture County Sheriff’s Department may be overreacting.

“He’s ruthless, but he’s not crazy. There’s reason to be cautious. But it’s not a reason to start digging bomb shelters.” (source)

Hawaii’s Tourism Authority is likewise unimpressed. Charlene Chan, their spokeswoman, said in a statement:

“Everyone’s safety in Hawaii is always our top priority. However, we also know from speaking to our tourism industry partners that if reports are misinterpreted about the state’s need to prepare for an attack, this could lead to travelers and groups staying away from Hawaii. The effect of such a downturn would ultimately be felt by residents who rely on tourism’s success for their livelihood.” (source)

According to Chan, they shouldn’t be worried because an attack by North Korea “is a very remote possibility at this time.”

Finally, prepping becomes official.

I applaud the preparations being made. While the reason behind it is terrible, it’s always a positive sign when people realize that they can’t always depend on the government to save them.

This article explains what to do in the event of a nuclear strike. As stressed above, if you aren’t at Ground Zero, it’s entirely survivable and it isn’t going to turn into some nuclear winter in which your surviving neighbors decide which family to cook for dinner, ala The Road.

We can scoff at North Korea as much as we want, but the fact remains that their technology is advancing extremely rapidly. Their tests are becoming more successful. And this article doesn’t even touch on the potential of an EMP, which, if detonated over the middle of the US would have a potentially devastating effect for a long period of time.

While North Korea has to know that they’ll lose in the event of a war, the vibe I get from Kim Jong Un is that he would be delighted to cause as much damage as possible on his way out.

Think about the psychology of someone who knows he is going to die anyway. When they’ve got nothing left to lose, people become dangerous indeed.

The threat is real.