PDA

View Full Version : Wayne Madsen: China Fired Missile Seen In Southern California


Heat
November 12, 2010, 14:34
Wayne Madsen: China Fired Missile Seen In Southern California

Chinese show of force-supposedly

http://www.infowars.com/wayne-madsen-china-fired-missile-seen-in-southern-california/

chet
November 12, 2010, 15:20
Realistically, this is the most implausible and ridiculous of any explanation.

Within moments of an detectable ICBM launch that close to the lower 48 by a foreign power or, indeed, any entity other than DOD, we'd be at DEFCON 2 or 1. There would be a massive and unprecendented US Navy ASW presence off the coast of LA within hours. And, HSAS would be orange or red at the minimum.

Since none of that happened, in order to believe your link is true, you'd also have to believe that within moments, Obama and the entire DOD somehow knew that the Chinese ICBM was non nuclear and "accepted" this action as something other than a declaration of war........

AND

the Joint Chiefs agreed to unplug the entire NORAD and Homeland response systems in order to allow the Chinese to do this unmolested........

AND

the White House decided that an absolute "non response" with no public recognition of the event or ANY military reaction was the best option............


Any sane person knows that the above is almost literally physically impossible.

The president's desk would look like an astronomy chart from all the stars left behind by resigning generals in the wake of something like this.



:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

L Haney
November 12, 2010, 15:21
Best reply to the article, by far.

"Plissken Reply:
November 12th, 2010 at 12:02 am

look guys,

i’ve got some some very cheap anti-radiation, anti-biological, self oxygenating, urine purifying, efood producing, colloidal silver injecting, condom integrated, chemical resistant, nuclear blast rated (as long as you’re more than one hundred meters from ground zero) suits for sale.

and if you’re one of the first 100 to buy, i’ll include a special attachable knapsack capable of carrying 30 ounces of silver, 5 pounds of gold and a special pocket that can effectively hide your smith and wesson from any would be gun thieves….

how much would you expect to pay for this,

well nothing, check out the info wars shop,

all these classy “made in china life extension suits” are free except for the the 399$ shipping fees to any major US cities ….

you all have a nice day craping your pants now …"

Heat
November 12, 2010, 16:03
I agree its ludicrous..thats why I sarcastically said---supposedly

I am finding more and more of the 'info' that comes from Jones to be inplausible--every story is a 'bombshell' or 'groundbreaking'--its about as 'out there' as Art Bell during his UFO/Mayan calender heydays

RG Coburn
November 12, 2010, 16:29
If it were the jet contrail,you'd be able to go to the same spot,and see it day,after day,after day,after day...and it would have been taped long ago,not just something recent.Jets have been flying from west to east over the ocean for decades,yet this is the first time this sort of phenomenon occurs?

Heat
November 12, 2010, 17:19
If it was a chinese sub---and thats a big if---would it make it back to base? Would we have the capability to track and destroy it? Question to the Navy folks here--

Texas Jaguar
November 12, 2010, 18:02
"Destroy it" you said? That would be about the most irresponsible, pencil headed, rubber necked geek mistake that could be made.

On what grounds would destruction of the sub be warranted? The missle was launched in international waters and was directed away from the US mainland.

NORAD, despite their denials, were probably tracking the thing as soon as it got into the lower portion of the atmostsphere. The course, speed and destination were all calculated almost immediately.

Is it a provocative act? You bet your sweet a$$ it is. Is it worth igniting a thermonuclear exchange? I think not. And as far as destroying LA is concerned I don't think the Chinese would do us that big a favor.

The Chinese are pissed at US about the irresponsible way we have managed our economy. They are also pissed at themselves for getting involved up to their hip pockets in ownership of the debt we have boondoggled ourselves with.

This whole stunt, and thats exactly what it was a glorified stunt, was pulled off as a giant temper tantrum or fit of pique.

Sure as god made little green apples the Chinese know if they quit buying our bonds and cause the US to default or even lose substantial credit ratings they will suffer as bad or worse than we do.

FAL freek
November 12, 2010, 18:10
Remember the North Korean mini sub that supposedly blew up the oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico? :rolleyes:

TheOtherChris
November 12, 2010, 18:24
That was actually the dolphins (second most intelligent species on the planet) saying:
"So long and thanks for all the fish."

L Haney
November 12, 2010, 18:29
Originally posted by Texas Jaguar
And as far as destroying LA is concerned I don't think the Chinese would do us that big a favor.


From 35 miles away, with an ICBM? What you been smoking? A weapon with a 7000 mile range launched in SCUD range? This whole damn discussion sounds like virgins dissecting advanced sexual techniques. Heh! Let's check with the last American Idle champion. I'm sure they got the best opinion! Phuck, we deserve to be nuked. Get it over with.

alant
November 12, 2010, 18:45
For something resembling reality check this:

http://uncinus.wordpress.com/2010/11/09/4/#more-4

ftierson
November 12, 2010, 18:45
Originally posted by TheOtherChris
That was actually the dolphins (most intelligent species on the planet) saying:
"So long and thanks for all the fish."

Fixed it for you... :)

Forrest

cpd109
November 12, 2010, 19:06
Originally posted by alant
For something resembling reality check this:

http://uncinus.wordpress.com/2010/11/09/4/#more-4

A Chinese missile boat in LA waters is more of a reality check than these bozos. It is not a jet liner contrail or plume. The worst planes I ever say that had smoky exhaust were B-52s and F-4s. You'd see the smoke before the airplane. This is NOTHING like that.

Heat
November 12, 2010, 19:28
Originally posted by Texas Jaguar
"Destroy it" you said? That would be about the most irresponsible, pencil headed, rubber necked geek mistake that could be made.

On what grounds would destruction of the sub be warranted? The missle was launched in international waters and was directed away from the US mainland.

NORAD, despite their denials, were probably tracking the thing as soon as it got into the lower portion of the atmostsphere. The course, speed and destination were all calculated almost immediately.

Is it a provocative act? You bet your sweet a$$ it is. Is it worth igniting a thermonuclear exchange? I think not. And as far as destroying LA is concerned I don't think the Chinese would do us that big a favor.

The Chinese are pissed at US about the irresponsible way we have managed our economy. They are also pissed at themselves for getting involved up to their hip pockets in ownership of the debt we have boondoggled ourselves with.

This whole stunt, and thats exactly what it was a glorified stunt, was pulled off as a giant temper tantrum or fit of pique.

Sure as god made little green apples the Chinese know if they quit buying our bonds and cause the US to default or even lose substantial credit ratings they will suffer as bad or worse than we do.
Just a hypothetical question, calm down sparky:rolleyes:

cpd109
November 12, 2010, 19:41
Please excuse this rant- you'll read why.

I flew in P-3s as a navigator and TACCO. In 1990, with the demise of the Soviet Empire, the gubmint, in it's finite wisdom, decided to cut the ASW assets of the Navy. I do not know what the P3 ASW strength of the USN is now, but it has dwindled from about 48 active squardons with 9 aircraft each (IIRC) to about 16 with 8 aircraft. But that is not the important part. Training people who can find and sink enemy subs in another matter, but most imprtant is getting them the experince they need to do it on command- it's a perishable skill, like shooting. From the AWs (Antisubmarine Warfare POs) to the flight officers (all of them), and not to forget the ordnance man and in flight techs to keep the plane running (with it's 64K computer), it was a crew that could find and sink subs. Now, I don't know. I do know that they have been chopping at P-3s for about 20 years though. And doing away with the crews that have actual on top time with enemy subs.

Late last year, I posted a link on NAS Brunswick (ME) closing. Barbers PT HI had already closed IIRC. Not sure about Moffitt Field CA status. Jacksonville FL is the only P3 base I really think is still in operation. And they are phasing out the P3 in favor of the 737.
(I just cut about 500 lines to save space about why the P3 is better, so we'll just go on from here- please that this as a granted at this point.)

Submarines are very dangerous since they are not (usually) visible when submerged, can (and have) sunk surface ships almost at will, and can carry enough nukes to wipe out whole countries. But they are not taken serously, as evidenced by the demise of the land based ASW assets of the Navy. Why? I sure don't know.

I think it was Adm Gorchov (Soviet Navy CNO) who said that anytime he wanted to know where his submarines were, he needed only to find out where the P3s were. And most people don't know this tidbit- at the SALT talks, P3s were on the table as stratigic combat aircraft since they were the best air platform for locating, tracking and killing enemy subs. Helos and S-3s (if they are still around) are good too, but only a sub has more on station time than a P3. And it can't manuver at 325kts to get in an attack position on a sub, you know like for a missle rising out of the sea. And best of all, I know of only 1 sub that can shoot at a P3, so the P3 is pretty much the best asset going for ASW. The few we have left.

Oh, $hit, what are we going to do? If that really was a Chinese boat in LA, we have real troubles ahead. But, I still think it was a US boat that launched that missile. Could be wrong, but I haven't found anyone to counter my arguments or put up good scenarios yet. And it ties in too well with Barry on his overseas, tax payer funded junket of 3000 people, 65 a/c and 34 warships including an aircraft carrier battle group. And the stories that it's an optical illusion, jet contrail, or rocket model ranks up there with the idea that they were from another galaxy. It's all BS. We had all better hope it was Barry sending a message because if it's the Chinese sending a message, we're screwed.

Edit: In closing this post, I will say that this is what we get for looking at the less capable ship as the major threat and shutting down the ability to terminate it.

Rant off.

shlomo
November 12, 2010, 19:44
Originally posted by L Haney


From 35 miles away, with an ICBM? What you been smoking? A weapon with a 7000 mile range launched in SCUD range?

I dunno, Haney. Strategically, it makes no sense. Tactically, however, it is possible that the shot was meant to be seen, and not to strike a blow.

alant
November 12, 2010, 20:39
Originally posted by cpd109
A Chinese missile boat in LA waters is more of a reality check than these bozos. It is not a jet liner contrail or plume. The worst planes I ever say that had smoky exhaust were B-52s and F-4s. You'd see the smoke before the airplane. This is NOTHING like that.
Those are high altitude water vapor contrails not exhaust, like these:
http://freepages.military.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~josephkennedy/images/Combat/legends_contrails_b17.jpg
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_P9E_gJjdyag/SJvZozshszI/AAAAAAAAA_A/mhorODwJUsU/s400/B17.jpg

Not this:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_KgIqQvYUs3I/S6su0EtHIoI/AAAAAAAAV8I/l8iCNCt1NQc/s1600/Boeing_B-47B_jato.jpg

shlomo
November 12, 2010, 20:43
If you think that any of those exhaust contrails look anything like the event off LA, you're smokin' crack.

alant
November 12, 2010, 20:56
Here's a Trident Submarine Launched Balistic Missile (SLBM) being fired:
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/fl37UZvFsz0?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/fl37UZvFsz0?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

ICBM Launch, note 45 seconds to reach 50,000 feet, 62 seconds to 100k feet
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7jFCmfAhhQg?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7jFCmfAhhQg?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

alant
November 12, 2010, 21:13
Originally posted by shlomo
If you think that any of those exhaust contrails look anything like the event off LA, you're smokin' crack.
No, those were WWII propellor planes creating a contrail, I showed that so there would be no confusing it with jet exhaust.

These are jet contrails:
http://www.rps.psu.edu/probing/graphics/contrails.jpg

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/y8iD7qo8uOE?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/y8iD7qo8uOE?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

But you can believe whatever you want.
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/S-sgn1PNDD4?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S-sgn1PNDD4?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

What does the Glenn Beck say?

shlomo
November 12, 2010, 21:31
Originally posted by alant

No, those were WWII propellor planes creating a contrail, I showed that so there would be no confusing it with jet exhaust.

These are jet contrails:
http://www.rps.psu.edu/probing/graphics/contrails.jpg

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/y8iD7qo8uOE?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/y8iD7qo8uOE?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

But you can believe whatever you want.
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/S-sgn1PNDD4?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S-sgn1PNDD4?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

What does the Glenn Beck say?

And those jet contrails don't look a damn bit like the LA event, either. I grew up in sight of Launch Complex 39's liftoffs, and in the flight path of a SAC base in central Florida. I know what a jet contrail looks like, and also what a rocket booster looks like.

As to the reptilians, let 'em bring it on. I got Slim Whitman's "Indian Love Call" on standby, 24/7. I ain't skeered.

FAL freek
November 12, 2010, 22:53
All this conspiracy stuff is killing me. Not one person, shadow government, shaman, entity, santa clause, or TEOTWAWKI voodoo priestess has come out claiming credit for lobbing the shiny roman candle skyward off the coast of California and everybody and their brother has a theory that their favorite boogeyman has done it. Originally posted by shlomo

As to the reptilians, let 'em bring it on. I got Slim Whitman's "Indian Love Call" on standby, 24/7. I ain't skeered. :rofl: Man that's too good!

alant
November 13, 2010, 06:21
Where is the Glenn Beck on this? What has he got to say?

Was that George Soros putting up a satellite as part of his evil plot to destroy the USA? Someone demonstrating their 2nd Amendment rights? Could it have been Chuck Norris kicking some a$$?

I'm going with contrails, with Chuck Norris as a backup explaination.

Deltaten
November 13, 2010, 09:18
Well... AFA the Pleidian "mother"....

She *may* be nutz; but I'd have a whack at it! Give'r a little thorazine ta calm her down first, tho ;)

carguym14
November 13, 2010, 12:02
Originally posted by cpd109
Please excuse this rant- you'll read why.

I flew in P-3s as a navigator and TACCO. In 1990, with the demise of the Soviet Empire, the gubmint, in it's finite wisdom, decided to cut the ASW assets of the Navy. I do not know what the P3 ASW strength of the USN is now, but it has dwindled from about 48 active squardons with 9 aircraft each (IIRC) to about 16 with 8 aircraft. But that is not the important part. Training people who can find and sink enemy subs in another matter, but most imprtant is getting them the experince they need to do it on command- it's a perishable skill, like shooting. From the AWs (Antisubmarine Warfare POs) to the flight officers (all of them), and not to forget the ordnance man and in flight techs to keep the plane running (with it's 64K computer), it was a crew that could find and sink subs. Now, I don't know. I do know that they have been chopping at P-3s for about 20 years though. And doing away with the crews that have actual on top time with enemy subs.

Late last year, I posted a link on NAS Brunswick (ME) closing. Barbers PT HI had already closed IIRC. Not sure about Moffitt Field CA status. Jacksonville FL is the only P3 base I really think is still in operation. And they are phasing out the P3 in favor of the 737.
(I just cut about 500 lines to save space about why the P3 is better, so we'll just go on from here- please that this as a granted at this point.)

Submarines are very dangerous since they are not (usually) visible when submerged, can (and have) sunk surface ships almost at will, and can carry enough nukes to wipe out whole countries. But they are not taken serously, as evidenced by the demise of the land based ASW assets of the Navy. Why? I sure don't know.

I think it was Adm Gorchov (Soviet Navy CNO) who said that anytime he wanted to know where his submarines were, he needed only to find out where the P3s were. And most people don't know this tidbit- at the SALT talks, P3s were on the table as stratigic combat aircraft since they were the best air platform for locating, tracking and killing enemy subs. Helos and S-3s (if they are still around) are good too, but only a sub has more on station time than a P3. And it can't manuver at 325kts to get in an attack position on a sub, you know like for a missle rising out of the sea. And best of all, I know of only 1 sub that can shoot at a P3, so the P3 is pretty much the best asset going for ASW. The few we have left.

Oh, $hit, what are we going to do? If that really was a Chinese boat in LA, we have real troubles ahead. But, I still think it was a US boat that launched that missile. Could be wrong, but I haven't found anyone to counter my arguments or put up good scenarios yet. And it ties in too well with Barry on his overseas, tax payer funded junket of 3000 people, 65 a/c and 34 warships including an aircraft carrier battle group. And the stories that it's an optical illusion, jet contrail, or rocket model ranks up there with the idea that they were from another galaxy. It's all BS. We had all better hope it was Barry sending a message because if it's the Chinese sending a message, we're screwed.

Edit: In closing this post, I will say that this is what we get for looking at the less capable ship as the major threat and shutting down the ability to terminate it.

Rant off.



Just curious-if it was "Barry sending a message",what message would that be?

China (and the rest of the world) already have a good idea of our capabilities.What does launching something 35 miles off our coast show them??

Bawana jim
November 13, 2010, 12:17
So I guess a few years back when a Chinese sub surfaced right in the middle of US fleet manuvers that they Knew it was there all the time? Don't disscount the possibility that Chinese subs can be off the coast undetected.

jim

carguym14
November 13, 2010, 12:24
It wouldn't surprise me in the least that the Chinese could get that close in a sub (or modified container ship).Underestimating the Chinese would not be a good thing.

You would think there would be more witnesses coming forward from boats on the water or people on Catalina island saying they saw something come out of the water.So far,I have not heard of anyone witnessing the launch.

carguym14
November 13, 2010, 12:26
Originally posted by Bawana jim
So I guess a few years back when a Chinese sub surfaced right in the middle of US fleet manuvers that they Knew it was there all the time? Don't disscount the possibility that Chinese subs can be off the coast undetected.

jim


That could go either way-maybe we knew they were there the whole time,and wanted them to think they were able to sneak up on us?Make them overconfident in their abilities?

Or we are overconfident in our equipment and abilities and they were able to sneak in.Hard to say.

Raspeguy
November 13, 2010, 13:06
At this point in time, one plausible explanation arises if it was a US missile, combined with the intended "confusion" surrounding the incident, is to promote paranoia about China. That way the military can extort more money for a phantom enemy with an agreeable public, or delay or prevent any budget cuts that may adversely affect their little honey pot. The military is just as corrupt, and damnable in their "honorable" oaths, in screwing the public as the other two parts of the trilogy (financial and corporate). Time these three get done raping the public, they won't have a pot left to piss in.

They conducted a similar deception in the 80s against Sweden when their attitude against the Soviets was not hostile enough to suit NATO. By US or US directed submarine incursions into Sweden's territorial waters, with the intention of blaming it on the Soviets, they raised the fear factor to the extent that the majority of Swedes were swayed over into an anti-Soviet attitude. There was also a collusion with the uppermost ranks of the Swedish military to establish rules of engagements that would effectively prevent their naval forces from sinking any of these submersibles and bottom crawlers, such as delaying a full minute the correct timing before launching a depth charge, to ensure no damage was done to the sub. Except in one case, where something went amiss, and seriously damaged one. As audible evidence was gathered that serious repairs were being made, the Swedes were repeatedly restrained from futher intervening by high naval authority. Of course, the assassination of Palme, was advantageous to the West's agenda regarding Sweden. The Swedish Navy could have kicked ass if not hobbled from above. It was also strongly suspected that these incursions that popped up out of nowhere were the result of subs being attached to freighters legally entering their waters and released while the mother submersibles remained just outside their territorial limits for retrieval or to provide rescue in case of trouble.

As of now, it's all just speculation on the internet, except for the three raping the public.

FAL freek
November 13, 2010, 16:10
Originally posted by Raspeguy
They conducted a similar deception in the 80s against Sweden when their attitude against the Soviets was not hostile enough to suit NATO. By US or US directed submarine incursions into Sweden's territorial waters, with the intention of blaming it on the Soviets, they raised the fear factor to the extent that the majority of Swedes were swayed over into an anti-Soviet attitude. There was also a collusion with the uppermost ranks of the Swedish military to establish rules of engagements that would effectively prevent their naval forces from sinking any of these submersibles and bottom crawlers, such as delaying a full minute the correct timing before launching a depth charge, to ensure no damage was done to the sub. Except in one case, where something went amiss, and seriously damaged one. As audible evidence was gathered that serious repairs were being made, the Swedes were repeatedly restrained from futher intervening by high naval authority. Of course, the assassination of Palme, was advantageous to the West's agenda regarding Sweden. The Swedish Navy could have kicked ass if not hobbled from above. It was also strongly suspected that these incursions that popped up out of nowhere were the result of subs being attached to freighters legally entering their waters and released while the mother submersibles remained just outside their territorial limits for retrieval or to provide rescue in case of trouble.
And you get your information from where? Funny the Swedes I conversed with about their national defense while over there had stated that the Soviets had been sending their subs into Swedish waters for decades because the Swedes lobbed live depth charges at them. They also remarked about how their military service requirements was somewhat of a national joke. Sure there are the small professional core of soldiers that believe in their job but the vast majority of their military was of normal folks doing their two years service because the law demanded it. Guess almost 200 years of no warfare will do that to a country. Going down their version of the interstate is pretty neat as they have paved areas off the road for their jets to park in case they ever have to use their roads for runways if the Russkies ever did decide to invade (of which I got to see a demonstration of during an airshow). And their fighter planes are nothing any country would want to mix it up with. But every one of them also made it a point to say that although they were technically neutral it was well known by everybody on all sides that they would side with NATO if war ever broke out.

Find it interesting this old conspiracy is coming to light again. Assuming in no small part to the Mankell book that came out last year. But then guess the U 137 incident was an American sub?

bykerhd
November 13, 2010, 17:24
If that were the Chinese jerking around firing a missile, can you imagine the amount of time required for a DECISION about a response from the Obummer administration ??? :eek:

No one, except MAYBE some rogue military type, would dare authorize any response without Obummer's personal ok.

Obummer would have to be found. Wherever he was.
The situation explained to him, including ALL options, several times.
Michelle and her mom, the Voodoo lady, would have to be also brought in to the picture.

After ALL options have been considered by Obummer, the Voodoo lady has checked with the spirits, Michelle's entourage has signed off, and the situation has NOT managed to resolve itself, a strong statement would be issued explaining how this was all Bush's fault. :rolleyes:

carguym14
November 13, 2010, 20:06
Originally posted by FAL freek
And you get your information from where? Funny the Swedes I conversed with about their national defense while over there had stated that the Soviets had been sending their subs into Swedish waters for decades because the Swedes lobbed live depth charges at them. They also remarked about how their military service requirements was somewhat of a national joke. Sure there are the small professional core of soldiers that believe in their job but the vast majority of their military was of normal folks doing their two years service because the law demanded it. Guess almost 200 years of no warfare will do that to a country. Going down their version of the interstate is pretty neat as they have paved areas off the road for their jets to park in case they ever have to use their roads for runways if the Russkies ever did decide to invade (of which I got to see a demonstration of during an airshow). And their fighter planes are nothing any country would want to mix it up with. But every one of them also made it a point to say that although they were technically neutral it was well known by everybody on all sides that they would side with NATO if war ever broke out.

Find it interesting this old conspiracy is coming to light again. Assuming in no small part to the Mankell book that came out last year. But then guess the U 137 incident was an American sub?


I remember reading about our interstate highway system and how they had to have certain length straightaways for runways as well.Your post jogged my memory.

WarriorPoet
November 13, 2010, 20:26
Just an observation........

In that "explanation video" posted above........

On the "fresh" contrail, right behind the object, the sun is reflecting off the RIGHT side of the contrail (from our perspective).........

But the sun is reflecting off the LEFT side of the plane (?????)

Anyone else see this, or is just me?


Meaning: If the sun was reflecting off the belly of the plane, then the sun should be reflecting off the "belly" of the contrail as well - NOT just the right side.

hmmmmm.............

-WP

renaissance_warrior
November 13, 2010, 20:42
Well funny thing is, no radar print, no trajectory, no object. An oceanic anomoly. I would look more at a seismograph than radar.

TheOtherChris
November 13, 2010, 22:46
Originally posted by ftierson


Fixed it for you... :)

Forrest

"Humans are bipedal creatures from Earth, and the third most intelligent species on that planet.(Surpassed only by mice and dolphins.) Originally thought to have evolved from proto-apes, humans may in fact be descendants of Golgafrinchan telephone sanitizers, account executives, and marketing analysts who were tricked out of leaving their home planet to arrive on the planet ca. two million BC. These Golgafrinchans apparently displaced the indigenous cavemen as the organic components in the computer designed by Deep Thought.

cpd109
November 13, 2010, 23:06
Originally posted by carguym14




Just curious-if it was "Barry sending a message",what message would that be?

China (and the rest of the world) already have a good idea of our capabilities.What does launching something 35 miles off our coast show them??

Just a reiteration of what we can do, and that he will do it.

cpd109
November 13, 2010, 23:10
Originally posted by Bawana jim
So I guess a few years back when a Chinese sub surfaced right in the middle of US fleet manuvers that they Knew it was there all the time? Don't disscount the possibility that Chinese subs can be off the coast undetected.

jim

Yep= read my rant. It really is upsetting to me that the administration has ignored the asset that can keep the country safest. (My opinion- not to reflect poorly on my brother ASWers.) The carrier battle gropup has it's own ASW assets that usually don't include P3s, but could if requested.

cowbilly
November 14, 2010, 00:17
Trust me, we track the boomer subs, not many countries can afford them so it is not difficult to watch them. NATO usually has an attack sub or tracking ship waiting on them when they leave port. Russians (Soviets) used to do the same with ours, I'm sure they are still at it. It has always been in our best interest to watch where those subs go very carefully, we generally know when they are coming and going and have a trailer of some sort watching them.

As with every good piece of equipment, the P3 was/is/eventually phased out for something we think is better.

The F14 has been parked at the museum. The F15 has been surpassed in terms of speed and manuever. F16 will start to go away too as all of our airframes have seen heavy use in the last 9 years. You can only rebuild an airframe so many times. The F22 fleet needs to be expanded and the F35 will hopefully avoid the budget cuts as both will be needed.

alant
November 14, 2010, 11:24
Remeber George Bush and his SecDef were going to "skip a generation" of equipment/technology? That skip, when applied to aircraft, should see us building unmanned aircraft not F22s and F35s. I guess the "pilot union" won that negotiation.

Pistolwiz
November 14, 2010, 12:53
Our ASW ability has been severely cut in the last 15 years. The SOSUS system is not as large. Only two sub bases left. The Chinese already showed us that their diesel boats are extremely quiet when submerged. We all remember one popping up in the middle of a task force.... The carrier was dead if it was real. They can also stay down quit a long time. These are not your WW2 diesel boats for sure.

I say Chinese. Like Mr Madsen said.....(From memory on his live interview about this.)"The Chinese don't have a vested interest in scaring the US public. It was a message to Obama and those at the G20 summit."

The razor is sharp and this is what splits off to me. The most obvious must be true.

BTW- That was a rocket engine. If you think that was a contrail. Neither I or anybody can fix ya........

alant
November 14, 2010, 15:07
The Soviet Union curled up and died, along with it most of the sub threat. Are we supposed to maintain cold war ASW capabilities when there is very little activity to chase?

The Chinese have one old SSBN that can be heard half way across the Pacific and 1 new boat that is better with a 2nd new boat fitting out. These are not as good as what the Russians have left over from the cold war.

If that was a Chinese missile it would be the first launch from one of the new subs - highly unlikely. http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/sub/type094jin.asp

I'm still going with contrail.

Our defense budget is about what the rest of the planet spends combined. We're going broke and need to look at defense expenditures along with everything else.

Bawana jim
November 14, 2010, 15:41
Another interesting point of view..

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2627072/posts :biggrin:

alant
November 14, 2010, 16:56
Um, yeah, the Chinese hacked into our missile launch system and fired that baby. Someone's been hitting the ol' hash pipe a leetle too much.

Still waiting to hear from some fishing boat, whale watcher or freighter captain on this. No sightings of a missile launch is a clear indication there was not one.

Civilian witnesses aren't going to cover this up - they would've called relatives, e-mailed the cell phone video, called 9-1-1 and a dozen other things before calling the military.

This is southern frakin California in broad daylight.

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/e22S98LNIq0?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/e22S98LNIq0?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

Pistolwiz
November 14, 2010, 18:12
Originally posted by alant
The Soviet Union curled up and died, along with it most of the sub threat. Are we supposed to maintain cold war ASW capabilities when there is very little activity to chase?

The Chinese have one old SSBN that can be heard half way across the Pacific and 1 new boat that is better with a 2nd new boat fitting out. These are not as good as what the Russians have left over from the cold war.

If that was a Chinese missile it would be the first launch from one of the new subs - highly unlikely. http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/sub/type094jin.asp

I'm still going with contrail.



Like I sez: " Neither I or anybody can fix ya......"


As a supposed officer. I would think you would know better than to underestimate the enemy. One of those noisy little subs popped up closer to a carrier than would be prudent in combat. Yet dolts still say they don't have the technology. We said the same thing about the Japanese and yet they cleaned Detroit's clock real good. Difference here is that the Chinese are playing much rougher and more final game.

Good luck with getting fixed BTW.........

RG Coburn
November 15, 2010, 00:31
Yeah...don't worry about that radar blip off Hawaii...
Its probably just a flight of B17s from the mainland...

carguym14
November 15, 2010, 09:17
Originally posted by Pistolwiz


Like I sez: " Neither I or anybody can fix ya......"


As a supposed officer. I would think you would know better than to underestimate the enemy. One of those noisy little subs popped up closer to a carrier than would be prudent in combat. Yet dolts still say they don't have the technology. We said the same thing about the Japanese and yet they cleaned Detroit's clock real good. Difference here is that the Chinese are playing much rougher and more final game.

Good luck with getting fixed BTW.........


Guess I need fixin' too.


Why hasn't someone from the island or a fishing baot come forward to say they saw "it" come out of the water.

Shirley someone had to see it break the surface of the water and head out??

I don't inderestimate the Chinese and their capabilities in the least,but I'm also not gonna jump in and say it was them when there is no compelling evidence,imo.

D.Fenestrate
November 15, 2010, 09:44
You surely have a good point. But please don't call me Shirley!

carguym14
November 15, 2010, 10:22
Originally posted by D.Fenestrate
You surely have a good point. But please don't call me Shirley!



:D

V guy
November 15, 2010, 11:23
Look, it was just Hollywood, ramping up fear, for the launch of the new "RED DAWN" movie!!

cpd109
November 15, 2010, 13:07
Originally posted by cowbilly
Trust me, we track the boomer subs, not many countries can afford them so it is not difficult to watch them. NATO usually has an attack sub or tracking ship waiting on them when they leave port. Russians (Soviets) used to do the same with ours, I'm sure they are still at it.

Two things.
1. Boomers are the most difficult sub to track.
2. Yeah, waiting on the boomers to leave port. How may attack boats do you think we have? While I can only guess this is what had happened, I don't know how feasible it would be these days. Maybe if our attack boats hang out and then put a bell on the enemy boomer, that would work.:eek:

cowbilly
November 15, 2010, 16:45
cpd109, Some things for your things.

Look up how many ballistic missile subs the Chinese and the Russians have operational. Satellites tell us when they leave, when they arrive, when they are stocking up and missiles checked/rotated, maintenece turn around etc. We know how long it takes to put one out and what signature it makes on sonar and radar. Spies are also heavily involved with patrol times and areas. We watch their ports and they watch ours.

Keep in mind it is a NATO action so it is not just our 50 or so attack subs but also Germany's, Great Britain's, France'e et al, not to mention surface ships that are capable of tracking them. We don't let those things run around untracked with freedom of manuever. We know generally where they are at all times as a matter of national security, we've done it for the last 40-50 years.

Boomers are the quietest subs but not at all difficult to track, we do it all the time. They have specific moorings. Russia and China only have a few bases that can support them as do we.

Not a mountain but a mole hill.

Gary Harwell
November 15, 2010, 17:27
"We know generally where they are at all times as a matter of national security, we've done it for the last 40-50 years."
____________________________
I agree in retrospect it's unlikely at this time that there was a launch, BUT
what about the nuke warhead transported cross country and "lost" for 24 hours a couple of years ago? I think more than a few generals were retired on that one. Never say never when it comes to SNAFU possibility in the military.

cowbilly
November 15, 2010, 18:40
Clever requote as nothing is absolutely certain, especially with the current leadership regarding military affairs.

Current US attack boat fleet is around 54, almost half are Seawolf and Virginia Class, top of the line. The rest are updated LA Class which are no push-overs.

Russians have 14 SSBNs, only 3 are considered modern, 5 are being phased out due to age and money.

Chinese have 2 SSBNs, one older model and a new one which is rather impressive but nothing is known about the capabilities as the their first try was not so good.

Not so big a task.

RG Coburn
November 15, 2010, 18:56
We can do all that stuff,but can't seem to defeat an enemy with zero air or sea capabilities in afghanistan?

cowbilly
November 15, 2010, 19:14
A single hardened heart is the perfect weapon, hard to detect, hard to stop, hard to predict as they are not trained in any particular method. A submarine full of professionals is much easier to find and defend against.

Besides, our ROE prevents absolute victory and the enemy works within our self imposed limitations. Politicians want out, public support is eroding, few care but the ones fighting.

ftierson
November 15, 2010, 19:55
Originally posted by cowbilly
Current US attack boat fleet is around 54, almost half are Seawolf and Virginia Class, top of the line. The rest are updated LA Class which are no push-overs.

Where in the world did you get this...?

Three Seawolfs were built, with the Jimmy Carter (SSN-23) much delayed to add the 'multi-mission platform.'

The Virginia (SSN-774), lead ship of the class of simplified (compared to the SSN-21 boats) SSNs was commissioned in 2004, four additional boats were commissioned through 2008 and SSN-779 was delivered in 2009. Four more boats (SSN-780-783) are under construction for delivery by 2013.

Not quite 'almost half' by most reckoning...

Forrest

ftierson
November 15, 2010, 19:58
Originally posted by cowbilly
Besides, our ROE prevents absolute victory and the enemy works within our self imposed limitations. Politicians want out, public support is eroding, few care but the ones fighting.

Ain't that the truth...

And we're broke to boot...

Forrest

Cava3r4
November 15, 2010, 22:01
it was either a flying saucer or swamp gas.
now move along sonny!
:eek:

chet
November 16, 2010, 00:51
Originally posted by RG Coburn
We can do all that stuff,but can't seem to defeat an enemy with zero air or sea capabilities in afghanistan?

Yep, because neither this president nor the last nor the American people collectively can define "victory" and "defeat" or even "enemy" in AFG.

alant
November 16, 2010, 05:44
Originally posted by chet
Yep, because neither this president nor the last nor the American people collectively can define "victory" and "defeat" or even "enemy" in AFG.
Ain't that the truth!

cowbilly
November 16, 2010, 10:55
Apologies, 7 Virginia class active, 3 Seawolf active, 4 Virginia class under construction, 7 Authorized (one started and named). 21 total once outfitting is complete 21 of 54 will be the latest and greatest. From my understanding, no more LA Class boats will be updated and the Virginia Class will replace the older updated LA Class leaving us with 54 attack boats (pending additional cuts).


http://www.navysite.de/submarine.htm


My overall point was that we have the boats/ships and manpower to keep track of our enemies nuclear platforms. Someone gets briefed on these asset locations everyday.

davedude
November 16, 2010, 13:14
My Dad was a US Navy diesel sub Commander. He could hide his boat from the best detection efforts the US Navy had when he wanted to and did.

You guys thinking we know where everybody's boats are are mistaken.

Dave Dude

chet
November 16, 2010, 14:27
On the surface of it (no pun), knowing where foreign subs are at any given moment is irrelevant to the incident.

If there was a launch of any type from a sub that close to LA, the Navy would have mustered whatever ASW response it could, even if that response was benign.

There was no response. Ergo, there was no foreign sub launch. Period.

cpd is correct however. The P3 Orion situation is pitiful. I'm surprised we don't have Neptunes coming out of mothballs. The Navy is swamped with boondoogles like LCS,DDG1000, and LPD 17. The Navy knew the P3 needed replacing back in the 80's. Now, the replacement will not come online before 2013. Let's hope airborne ASW isn't needed on a large scale before then. We don't have the parts or the pilots to accomplish much with the P3.

alant
November 16, 2010, 15:15
We can build airplanes a lot faster than anyone can build subs.

ftierson
November 16, 2010, 15:53
Originally posted by chet
cpd is correct however. The P3 Orion situation is pitiful. I'm surprised we don't have Neptunes coming out of mothballs. The Navy is swamped with boondoogles like LCS,DDG1000, and LPD 17. The Navy knew the P3 needed replacing back in the 80's. Now, the replacement will not come online before 2013. Let's hope airborne ASW isn't needed on a large scale before then. We don't have the parts or the pilots to accomplish much with the P3.

At least the DDG-1000 program was capped at three ships, with more DDG-51s requested instead of the additional DDG-1000 ships...

Of course, the money already spend on the DDG-1000 program would have bought several more DDG-51s...

Clearly, we are throwing away our military capabilities to ensure that we're no threat to the NWO...

Forrest

StarPD
November 16, 2010, 17:00
I'm with Shlomo.
I've seen MANY jet plane contrails, and I've seen rocket launchings. I can assure you that they don't look even remotely alike.

So what was it? Damfino. But don't discount that it was a Chinee sub making a statement. As for retaliatory attacks, if the Navy couldn't know where it was in the first place, how would they be able to find and attack it after the event?

Further, I note that the exhaust plume was headed AWAY from LA, which would lessen any concerns about an attack on an American city. The fact that it was a single launch rather than multiples would lessen fears of an all-out attack too.

As for the lack of confirmation of a launch, you didn't really think the government would admit to being snookered, didja?

Looks to me like another unanswered anomaly, much like the passenger plane that went down off the American coast in the Atlantic some years back. Still no definitive answer on that one, despite the many examples of conjecture.

We may never know, unless the issue escalates further and develops into full scale warfare. Remember, we didn't think the Japnese would attack Pearl Harbor until it happened. We really don't know about EVERYTHING the Chinee are doing now, do we?

ThunderGod
November 17, 2010, 11:36
Some of y'all seem to forget that the Chinese know all they need to know about our P3s' capabilities. They had an intact one for a few months back in 2001.

Bawana jim
November 17, 2010, 11:59
Also note that the Chinese stold our screw technology making their subs undetectable by sound.

jim

carguym14
November 17, 2010, 12:49
Originally posted by Bawana jim
Also note that the Chinese stold our screw technology making their subs undetectable by sound.

jim


Stole is pretty harsh.

I thought they were able to buy all they needed,and clinton filled in some blanks to help them out.......

cpd109
November 17, 2010, 13:05
http://www.resistnet.com/profiles/blogs/another-government-coverup?xg_source=activity

I found this today. It says Chinese were making a statement to Barry about getting back worthless dollars for their bonds. Also read somewhere that the color and density of the missile smoke inidcates it was at least foreign. (At last something I can support indicating it was not a US sub.) And I haven't found much on the Chinese SSBN program or missiles. In either case (US or Chinese sub), the missile went away from US soil clearling indicated that there was no threat. The most troubling thing is, if it was Chinese, this was a demonstation that their missiles do indeed fly. I also suspect that they will be able to fly at least the width of the US. I am most upset that they got so close w/o detection.

BUFF
November 17, 2010, 22:30
"Some of y'all seem to forget that the Chinese know all they need to know about our P3s' capabilities. They had an intact one for a few months back in 2001."

The aircraft that was forced down was a P-3 but not a ASW aircraft. It was an electronic surveillance variant, an electronics signals snooper.

cpd109
November 18, 2010, 12:02
Originally posted by BUFF
"Some of y'all seem to forget that the Chinese know all they need to know about our P3s' capabilities. They had an intact one for a few months back in 2001."

The aircraft that was forced down was a P-3 but not a ASW aircraft. It was an electronic surveillance variant, an electronics signals snooper.

That's true about the EP-3. They probably got the better deal with it depending on how much stuff got destroyed on the plane before the Chinese came on board. How do you say "Remember the Pueblo"? That was an emergency destruction mess. The Capt had even requested explosives (IIRC) to scuttle the ship if need be. It was slow and wouldn't be able to run, had almost no arms so couldn't fight, had a limited destruction capability so scuttling was the next best thing, as long as the water was deep enough. But no, it's still on active duty somewhere in NK. Manned by the NKs.

alant
November 18, 2010, 12:42
Does China even have an operational submarine launched balistic missile (SLBM)? This report is from January2010.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2437433/posts

China: SLBM Test Launch Failed

(the missile) fell back on the submarine and almost sank it.

A few months ago in Yellow Sea, China conducted a secret test launch of Julang-2 SLBM, but failed, according to Jan. 25 report by Liberty Times of Taiwan.

The missile with the range of 8,000 km, which can strike U.S. mainland, was mounted on a Golf-class submarine, and launched from underwater. However, after breaking out of water, its booster failed to fire up, and fell back down on the submarine.

The submarine with 83 crews and displacement of 2,880 tons was hit by the missile weighing 10 tons, and was almost sunk. Still it managed to limp back to its base.

Ten years ago, PLAN developed Julang-2 by modifying Dongfeng-31 ICBM, and successfully conducted the surface launch, but a few attempt of underwater launch all failed.

As a result, Type 094(Jin-class) submarine, China's newest model, is so far unable to be equip itself with its own SLBM's, leaving a big hole in China's offensive nuclear capability, according to the newspaper.

They succeeded in the test launch of Julang-1 from Type 092(Xia-class) submarine, hitting a target in Taklamakan Desert, but its range is only 2,000 km and this class of submarine mostly moves within coastal waters, which is why they decided to develop Julang-2.

carguym14
November 18, 2010, 13:22
Originally posted by alant
Does China even have an operational submarine launched balistic missile (SLBM)? This report is from January2010.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2437433/posts

China: SLBM Test Launch Failed

(the missile) fell back on the submarine and almost sank it.

A few months ago in Yellow Sea, China conducted a secret test launch of Julang-2 SLBM, but failed, according to Jan. 25 report by Liberty Times of Taiwan.

The missile with the range of 8,000 km, which can strike U.S. mainland, was mounted on a Golf-class submarine, and launched from underwater. However, after breaking out of water, its booster failed to fire up, and fell back down on the submarine.

The submarine with 83 crews and displacement of 2,880 tons was hit by the missile weighing 10 tons, and was almost sunk. Still it managed to limp back to its base.

Ten years ago, PLAN developed Julang-2 by modifying Dongfeng-31 ICBM, and successfully conducted the surface launch, but a few attempt of underwater launch all failed.

As a result, Type 094(Jin-class) submarine, China's newest model, is so far unable to be equip itself with its own SLBM's, leaving a big hole in China's offensive nuclear capability, according to the newspaper.

They succeeded in the test launch of Julang-1 from Type 092(Xia-class) submarine, hitting a target in Taklamakan Desert, but its range is only 2,000 km and this class of submarine mostly moves within coastal waters, which is why they decided to develop Julang-2.



Damn,wonder how many people got executed for that fiasco............

Slow
November 22, 2010, 11:39
swamp gas, have some more koolaid.

RG Coburn
November 22, 2010, 12:54
Heck,what better way to announce you have a successful launch system,than to do it outside your main adversary's bedroom window?

alant
November 22, 2010, 19:04
Originally posted by RG Coburn
Heck,what better way to announce you have a successful launch system,than to do it outside your main adversary's bedroom window? There are lots of reasons why no sane country would do that.

RG Coburn
November 22, 2010, 19:46
"Audacity,audacity,always audacity"...

CactusCapt
November 22, 2010, 20:26
Well, having stumbled onto this thread at this late date, I can only offer my opinion. I have been flying jet aircraft for almost 30 years, watched missile/shuttle launches from the ground and the air (a Minuteman staging when witnessed at twilight and looking up the back side of the rocket from FL390 is spectacular!), witnessed vehicle re-entries at Kwaj, and seen some very cool things such as blue jets projecting from the tops of severe thunderstorms. This here phenomena looks to me like a genuine jet contrail.

The perspective you get when looking out over the ocean is very conducive to visual illusions. The aforementioned Minuteman launch looked exactly like a scene from a scifi movie of a meteor entering the upper atmosphere. We had difficulty ascertaining which way the missile was headed. It actually looked like it was headed towards us--very cool. This event looked nothing like a launch to me or anyone else I asked that has similar experience. Everyone in the Crew Room (literally several hundred thousand hours of flying time) was laughing at the theories being put forth concerning rockets, etc. You guys have fun, OK?:whiskey:

martin35
November 23, 2010, 16:13
Point Mugu rocket test range. They don't publish their test schedules or results unless ordered to. They usually do prohibit traffic in the area though.
Was delayed on a rig crew change helicopter flight offshore near there years ago.

FAL freek
November 24, 2010, 01:19
Originally posted by CactusCapt
Everyone in the Crew Room (literally several hundred thousand hours of flying time) was laughing at the theories being put forth concerning rockets, etc. You guys have fun, OK?:whiskey: Thank you for a voice of sanity.

Powderfinger
November 24, 2010, 10:43
Originally posted by carguym14



Stole is pretty harsh.

I thought they were able to buy all they needed,and clinton filled in some blanks to help them out.......

Toshiba of Japan sold advanced milling machines to Moscow in the '80s, who shared with the Chinese.
Clinton let the Chinese obtain missile technology.

ftierson
November 24, 2010, 12:05
Originally posted by Powderfinger


Toshiba of Japan sold advanced milling machines to Moscow in the '80s, who shared with the Chinese.
Clinton let the Chinese obtain missile technology.

And the W87...

Forrest

cpd109
November 24, 2010, 17:04
Originally posted by Powderfinger


Toshiba of Japan sold advanced milling machines to Moscow in the '80s, who shared with the Chinese.
Clinton let the Chinese obtain missile technology.

For those out of the know, these were 9 axis mills for making super quiet propellers. (I quit buying anything from Toshiba after this becasue it had a serious impact on our ability to detect Soviet Subs (Discovery Channel says so)). Thanks John Walker for selling out your country in all those messages you compromised, may you rot in hell.