News Stories

[Tom Bombadil]

Originally Posted by Mentar

Actually, it's not quite THAT funny.


Possibility 3: NOT launched by the US military. Unsettling, but perfectly possible. THIS would make sense, as a message: "Look, we can fire strategic missiles at you from point-blank range." - as a threat. And if something like this happened, I'd expect the American DoD to react EXACTLY this way: Pretending not to know, insisting that this was no cause for alarm, and categorically denying that it could have been someone else.

Although we can not rule this completely out. I'd say it is very unlikely. 30 miles from LA is definitely within US territory. So having a submarine there would be a glaring breach of the sovereignty of the US. Landing a missile from there will be asking for war with the US. There are not that many nations with submarine based ICBM capabilities, and none of them have reason enough to pull such a stunt.

[Azumanga Davo]

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

"Sorry, guys! I was cleaning the rocket, and it went off on its own..."

Anyone with a gutter mind like mine has just thought of... oh dear.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by Mentar

Actually, it's not quite THAT funny.

Experts were saying that the kind of the vapor trail indicates a missile of considerable size, possibly a sub-launched ICBM. The Department of Defense has no clue who or what it was, but at the same time they claim that there's no cause for alarm, and that no foreign military would be behind this. (Which - in this combination - makes no sense whatsoever, but what could make the American press mention this little detail).

So. How could that happen?

Possibility 1: Launched by the US military, and someone has forgotten to announce the launch. Exceptionally unlikely, because the US military should know who fired the missile when, at least.

Possibility 2: Launched by the US military, but they're pretending not to know. Now why would they possibly do that? What's the point? Does anyone doubt that the US has submarine-based missile platforms? The only reason I can come up which would be remotely likely would be that this was some kind of accident. But if that's the case, that's no reason to worry?!?!

Possibility 3: NOT launched by the US military. Unsettling, but perfectly possible. THIS would make sense, as a message: "Look, we can fire strategic missiles at you from point-blank range." - as a threat. And if something like this happened, I'd expect the American DoD to react EXACTLY this way: Pretending not to know, insisting that this was no cause for alarm, and categorically denying that it could have been someone else.

So let's see with which cover story they'll be coming up. If there's no detailed final conclusion, and we see the story dying out in the media quickly, I'm convinced it will have been 3) - and then I'm wondering what the *censored* is going on to cause a major power to pull off a threat like that. And for WHAT?

If you look at news reports over the years, there's been a fair number of "unexplained" sky events on the West Coast that involve "stuff we can't talk about". Usually its a launch of some sort, an airplane, or a satellite breakup/re-entry...

But yeah... might be fun to keep an eye on this incident.

[Mentar]

Originally Posted by Tom Bombadil

Although we can not rule this completely out. I'd say it is very unlikely. 30 miles from LA is definitely within US territory. So having a submarine there would be a glaring breach of the sovereignty of the US. Landing a missile from there will be asking for war with the US. There are not that many nations with submarine based ICBM capabilities, and none of them have reason enough to pull such a stunt.

Well... technically, it most likely originated from waters that are outside of the 3-miles-zone, which designates the territory border. Therefore, by the letter of the law, it seems to have happened from international waters.

However, of course it would be a tremendous provocation, and it's something that wouldn't be done lightly. But it's a plain fact that it DID happen. Something WAS launched there, and it most definitely was no jet, like a harebrained Foxnews theory tried to peddle (for the gullible ones).

Missiles like that don't grow on trees and don't get lost. If the US military still hasn't found out, then it either wasn't one of theirs to begin with, or they're lying about it. Both options are troublesome.

There's one part where I strictly disagree with you though: "None of them have reason enough to pull such a stunt" - really? How do you know? Just for starters, Israeli and US hawks are actively pushing for a war with Iran. It's not inconceivable at all that some Iran allies (think China, for example) are telling Washington this way to come to their senses and apply pressure on Israel to cut it out.

We simply don't know. And the way the US military and the complicit media are dealing with the issue is not reassuring in the least.

[ganbaru]

Israeli building plans test Obama’s clout
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle1792638/
Are they trying to make thing worse on purpose or what?

[Tsuyoshi]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

Israeli building plans test Obama’s clout
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle1792638/
Are they trying to make thing worse on purpose or what?

I always had the feeling these peace talks wouldn't last for too long if at all. I'm surprised they went as long as they did but it looks like it's all gonna go to waste no with this little stunt they just pulled.

[Kamui4356]

Originally Posted by Mentar

Well... technically, it most likely originated from waters that are outside of the 3-miles-zone, which designates the territory border. Therefore, by the letter of the law, it seems to have happened from international waters.

However, of course it would be a tremendous provocation, and it's something that wouldn't be done lightly. But it's a plain fact that it DID happen. Something WAS launched there, and it most definitely was no jet, like a harebrained Foxnews theory tried to peddle (for the gullible ones).

Missiles like that don't grow on trees and don't get lost. If the US military still hasn't found out, then it either wasn't one of theirs to begin with, or they're lying about it. Both options are troublesome.

There's one part where I strictly disagree with you though: "None of them have reason enough to pull such a stunt" - really? How do you know? Just for starters, Israeli and US hawks are actively pushing for a war with Iran. It's not inconceivable at all that some Iran allies (think China, for example) are telling Washington this way to come to their senses and apply pressure on Israel to cut it out.

We simply don't know. And the way the US military and the complicit media are dealing with the issue is not reassuring in the least.

Cool conspiracy theory bro. The problem with it is, if it were an unexpected foreign missile, US forces should have been put on alert afterwards. As this didn't happen, the US military almost certainly knew in advance that the missile was being launched, if it was a missile. Denying things is how militaries work. It doesn't mean there's anything more sinister than normal, at least normal for an organization tasked with killing people in the most efficient manor possible, going on. It's entirely possible it was a planned test, then when it went off someone realized that this was probably a bad time to do something like that with the G-20 summit coming up, and they decided to deny it.

Also, the explanation that it's actually a plane is plausible, even if you heard about it on fox news. Remember, even a broken clock is right twice a day. Well analog clocks anyway, if it were digital it obviously wouldn't be.

http://contrailscience.com/

Those pictures are mostly from another "missile launch" that happened last December. That one did turn out to be a passenger aircraft.

[Tsuyoshi]

Originally Posted by Kamui4356

Cool conspiracy theory bro. The problem with it is, if it were an unexpected foreign missile, US forces should have been put on alert afterwards. As this didn't happen, the US military almost certainly knew in advance that the missile was being launched, if it was a missile. Denying things is how militaries work. It doesn't mean there's anything more sinister than normal, at least normal for an organization tasked with killing people in the most efficient manor possible, going on. It's entirely possible it was a planned test, then when it went off someone realized that this was probably a bad time to do something like that with the G-20 summit coming up, and they decided to deny it.

Indeed, militaries do hide and deny things. They could easily be hiding their state of alert so it doesn't cause the people to panic. Since there was no actual hostile attack on the US populace, there's no real reason to let anyone know that someone is out against them. A random missile isn't enough proof to say that someone is against them, especially when it's not known who shot it. And if the military were put into a public status, that would cause as much panic as admitting they (the US military) were the ones who shot the missile. It could go either way is all I'm saying.

[bladeofdarkness]

Originally Posted by Mentar

Well... technically, it most likely originated from waters that are outside of the 3-miles-zone, which designates the territory border. Therefore, by the letter of the law, it seems to have happened from international waters.

Originally Posted by Tsuyoshi

Indeed, militaries do hide and deny things. They could easily be hiding their state of alert so it doesn't cause the people to panic. Since there was no actual hostile attack on the US populace, there's no real reason to let anyone know that someone is out against them. A random missile isn't enough proof to say that someone is against them, especially when it's not known who shot it. And if the military were put into a public status, that would cause as much panic as admitting they (the US military) were the ones who shot the missile. It could go either way is all I'm saying.

are you suggesting that a someone (Russia, China, etc) had their submarine approach within 30 miles off of U.S coastline and fire an ICBM in the opposite direction, to send a message that they can reach that close to shore ?
why on earth would anyone bother getting THAT close to the shoreline to fire a missile that can travel cross continents ?
wouldn't exposing the fact that you can approach that close to shore without getting anything out of it kinda wasteful ?
it just seems incredibly expensive and risky for something that serves literally no purpose whatsoever.

way i figure it, this was either a U.S mistake that they don't want to admit (who wants to admit they fired an ICBM accidentally ?) or a test of some sort that is meant to remain classified.

[ninryu]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

Israeli building plans test Obama’s clout
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle1792638/
Are they trying to make thing worse on purpose or what?

it's all Bibi's fault. f**k him.

[bladeofdarkness]

Originally Posted by ninryu

it's all Bibi's fault. f**k him.

more like.
"its all Obamas fault for raising the matter of settlement construction freeze from a minor almost irrelevant topic, to a level where its now considered a pre-condition for negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians."
f**k him.

[Tsuyoshi]

Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness

Spoiler for snip:

are you suggesting that a someone (Russia, China, etc) had their submarine approach within 30 miles off of U.S coastline and fire an ICBM in the opposite direction, to send a message that they can reach that close to shore ?
why on earth would anyone bother getting THAT close to the shoreline to fire a missile that can travel cross continents ?
wouldn't exposing the fact that you can approach that close to shore without getting anything out of it kinda wasteful ?
it just seems incredibly expensive and risky for something that serves literally no purpose whatsoever.

way i figure it, this was either a U.S mistake that they don't want to admit (who wants to admit they fired an ICBM accidentally ?) or a test of some sort that is meant to remain classified.

Technically it was shot outside of the US water border (the article specifies they were 35 miles west of LA). Now I wouldn't say Russia, but recently, China has had some bad beef with the US, and there's also North Korea to think about. As to why they would get that close? Because being that close means there would be less time to detect the missile before it approaches than if you were to fire it from the other side of the pacific. It would be easier for the missile to reach the mainland which isn't as well defended compared to the coast lines. The Japanese managed to defeat the US in Pearl Harbor because they had managed to get close to them unnoticed. The idea here is similar, except this time they're not limited to hitting a military base as the Japanese back then obviously didn't have the kind of missile technology that exists today. And I wouldn't say it's wasteful. It's sending out a clear message to the powers that be in the US that they're not as invincible as they think they are.

Of course, I don't mean to say that it was definitely someone who holds a grudge against the US. There's not enough evidence to prove that in the first place so all one can do is speculate. Truth be told, I'm more willing to believe it was indeed a mistake by the US military or a classified project. All I'm saying is that while the motives behind such an action are, as you say, questionable, it's not impossible for someone to come that close and fire a missile.

[bladeofdarkness]

Originally Posted by Tsuyoshi

Technically it was shot outside of the US water border (the article specifies they were 35 miles west of LA). Now I wouldn't say Russia, but recently, China has had some bad beef with the US, and there's also North Korea to think about.

i'm fairly sure that NK doesn't have a submarine capable of traveling to within 35 miles of the U.S mainland and carry submarine launched ICBMs
thats some VERY high level stuff that even more advance members of the nuclear club don't own.

other then that, i mostly agree with you

[Tsuyoshi]

Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness

i'm fairly sure that NK doesn't have a submarine capable of traveling to within 35 miles of the U.S mainland and carry submarine launched ICBMs
thats some VERY high level stuff that even more advance members of the nuclear club don't own.

other then that, i mostly agree with you

Granted, NK isn't known to have that kind of equipment, but militaries have a habit of keeping things secret so it's not impossible that NK would have that kind of submarine but kept it a well guarded secret. That being said, I only mentioned NK as an example of a country that might have animosity toward the US and nothing more than that.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Mentar

Actually, it's not quite THAT funny.

Experts were saying that the kind of the vapor trail indicates a missile of considerable size, possibly a sub-launched ICBM. The Department of Defense has no clue who or what it was, but at the same time they claim that there's no cause for alarm, and that no foreign military would be behind this. (Which - in this combination - makes no sense whatsoever, but what could make the American press mention this little detail).

So. How could that happen?

Possibility 1: Launched by the US military, and someone has forgotten to announce the launch. Exceptionally unlikely, because the US military should know who fired the missile when, at least.

Possibility 2: Launched by the US military, but they're pretending not to know. Now why would they possibly do that? What's the point? Does anyone doubt that the US has submarine-based missile platforms? The only reason I can come up which would be remotely likely would be that this was some kind of accident. But if that's the case, that's no reason to worry?!?!

Possibility 3: NOT launched by the US military. Unsettling, but perfectly possible. THIS would make sense, as a message: "Look, we can fire strategic missiles at you from point-blank range." - as a threat. And if something like this happened, I'd expect the American DoD to react EXACTLY this way: Pretending not to know, insisting that this was no cause for alarm, and categorically denying that it could have been someone else.

So let's see with which cover story they'll be coming up. If there's no detailed final conclusion, and we see the story dying out in the media quickly, I'm convinced it will have been 3) - and then I'm wondering what the *censored* is going on to cause a major power to pull off a threat like that. And for WHAT?

Originally Posted by Vexx

If you look at news reports over the years, there's been a fair number of "unexplained" sky events on the West Coast that involve "stuff we can't talk about". Usually its a launch of some sort, an airplane, or a satellite breakup/re-entry...

But yeah... might be fun to keep an eye on this incident.

If it is a conspiracy theory, I think it is some rogue bombardment-sub commander trying to attack US. My bets are on China or Russia.

Then again, why should we even bother since the whole world is set for WWIII :

(Reuters) - Iran has developed a version of the Russian S-300 missile and will test-fire it soon, the official news agency IRNA said, two months after Moscow decided not to deliver it to Tehran to comply with U.N. sanctions.

"The Iranian (version) of the S-300 system is undergoing field modification and will be test-fired soon as other long range systems are being designed and produced," IRNA quoted Brigadier General Mohammad Hassan Mansourian, a commander in Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards, as saying.

World powers are locked in an eight-year-old stand-off with Iran over its nuclear energy programme, which they believe will be used to develop nuclear bombs rather than be devoted to peaceful generation of electricity, as Tehran says.

Some Western officials suspect Iran's development of more sophisticated missiles and some much-publicized missile tests could serve the goal of developing a deliverable nuclear weapon.

MISSILES FOR Defense ONLY, IRAN SAYS

The Islamic Republic denies such accusations, saying its missile development efforts are for defensive purposes only.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev banned the delivery of the high-precision S-300 air defense system to Iran in September, scuttling a tentative deal in gestation for years, saying it would violate expanded U.N. sanctions imposed in June over Iran's defiance of demands to curb its nuclear programme.

Iranian officials said after Russia scrapped the sale that Tehran had decided to build its own model of the S-300 but gave no sign that such plans had advanced beyond the drawing board.

"Buying S-300 missiles from the Russia was on the agenda to meet some of the security needs of our country," said Mansourian. "But under the pretext of the (U.N. Security Council) resolution and due to American and Zionist pressure, Russia refused to deliver the defensive system."

The Revolutionary Guards oversee Iran's missile programme.

The United States and Israel had urged Moscow to scrap the deal, fearing Iran could use S-300s to shield nuclear facilities that they suspect are part of an atomic bomb programme.

U.S. and Israeli officials have not ruled out a pre-emptive attack to knock out Iran's nuclear sites if diplomacy fails.

Iran this week offered world powers some dates for renewed talks but President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Thursday the disputed nuclear programme would not be up for negotiation.

The Islamic Republic has warned that its response to any military attack would be crushing.

Iranian officials have criticized their Russian counterparts for unilaterally nullifying the S-300 sale contract and threatened to seek compensation.

Last month, a senior Russian official said Moscow planned to pay back a $166.8 million advance payment made by Iran for the S-300.

Moscow's support for a fourth round of U.N. sanctions was part of a gradual shift closer toward the tougher stance that the United States and European Union have taken toward Iran.

Russia, which has built Iran's first civilian atomic power plant, backs Western efforts to make Iran prove its nuclear work is purely peaceful, but strongly opposes any use of force.

[bladeofdarkness]

Originally Posted by Tsuyoshi

Granted, NK isn't known to have that kind of equipment, but militaries have a habit of keeping things secret so it's not impossible that NK would have that kind of submarine but kept it a well guarded secret. That being said, I only mentioned NK as an example of a country that might have animosity toward the US.

trying to keep the construction of a nuclear submarine (what such a sub would HAVE to be) secret when you lack both resources and knowledge to construct it is close to impossible.
its not an exaggeration to say that its actually much more complex a process then building a nuclear bomb is.

India, Pakistan, and (if you believe the rumors) Israel all have had nuclear weapons for decades, and none of them have those kind of subs.

[Tsuyoshi]

I can't believe it. War may break out simply because one side wants to show it has bigger teeth than the other. But I'd rather think that we're nearing another cold war since there seems to be more conflict based on ideals rather than actual problems or excuses.

Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness

trying to keep the construction of a nuclear submarine (what such a sub would HAVE to be) secret when you lack both resources and knowledge to construct it is close to impossible.
its not an exaggeration to say that its actually much more complex a process then building a nuclear bomb is.

India, Pakistan, and (if you believe the rumors) Israel all have had nuclear weapons for decades, and none of them have those kind of subs.

I'm not saying that they are doing it, and I don't believe they have the resources either. As I said, it was just an example of a country who would have the motivation to threaten the US. You never know what sort of knowledge they have tho when you don't know what kind of intelligence networks NK might have.

[bladeofdarkness]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

Then again, why should we even bother since the whole world is set for WWIII :

Originally Posted by Tsuyoshi

I can't believe it. war may break out simply because one side wants to show it has bigger teeth than the other....

why ?
what about the story sets the stage for WWIII ?
the S-300 is an anti aircraft missile.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness

why ?
what about the story sets the stage for WWIII ?
the S-300 is an anti aircraft missile.

From a purely military standpoint, what is the fastest way of stopping a nuclear silo from launching its stuff?

[Kamui4356]

Originally Posted by Tsuyoshi

Technically it was shot outside of the US water border (the article specifies they were 35 miles west of LA). Now I wouldn't say Russia, but recently, China has had some bad beef with the US, and there's also North Korea to think about. As to why they would get that close? Because being that close means there would be less time to detect the missile before it approaches than if you were to fire it from the other side of the pacific. It would be easier for the missile to reach the mainland which isn't as well defended compared to the coast lines. The Japanese managed to defeat the US in Pearl Harbor because they had managed to get close to them unnoticed. The idea here is similar, except this time they're not limited to hitting a military base as the Japanese back then obviously didn't have the kind of missile technology that exists today. And I wouldn't say it's wasteful. It's sending out a clear message to the powers that be in the US that they're not as invincible as they think they are.

Of course, I don't mean to say that it was definitely someone who holds a grudge against the US. There's not enough evidence to prove that in the first place so all one can do is speculate. Truth be told, I'm more willing to believe it was indeed a mistake by the US military or a classified project. All I'm saying is that while the motives behind such an action are, as you say, questionable, it's not impossible for someone to come that close and fire a missile.

The problem there is SLBM have ranges in the thousands of miles. If you get within 35 miles of shore to launch one, you're doing it wrong. The absolute last place you want your ballistic missile subs to operate is in your enemy's littoral waters. Also if it were someone else, what's the point if they don't take responsibility?