Slashdot Mirror

There are 16 intelligence agencies which officially make up the "U.S. Intelligence Community". There are also a large number of other intelligence agencies for things such as law enforcement, etc.

http://www.fas.org/irp/official.html
http://www.intelligence.gov/1-members.shtml

Actually, my apologies, some rancid shitbird appear to have edited that entry. Long may they rot. Here is a fuller account...

It is in Technology Collection Trends in the U.S. Defense Industry 2006, Appendix 2 page 28 of the pdf file at http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/2006trends.pdf

A far more interesting case for slashdot readers is this one on the same page:

A female foreign national seduced an American male translator to give her his password in order to log on to his unclassified network. Upon discovery of this security breach, a computer audit revealed foreign intelligence service viruses throughout the system.

Who wouldn't give up their password in that case?

While it does sound far-fetched, there's a link to the Fas.org site under "Related" header on the right side of TFA. http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/2006trends.pdf (2.4 MB PDF warning). Due to the JavaScript vulnerability in Acrobat Reader, I have not read the file myself.

Blix said he views the U.S.-North Korea agreed framework as "a way of
promoting the implementation of the safeguards agreement" which already
exists between the IAEA and the DPRK. It was Pyongyang's announcement that
it was withdrawing from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT),
together with its threat to suspend permission for IAEA inspectors to carry
1ut their safeguards work, that triggered the North Korean nuclear crisis
in March 1993.

Hans Blix personally admonished Saddam for "cat and mouse" games [3] and warned Iraq of "serious consequences" if it attempted to hinder or delay his mission [4].

He used his signing statement to contradict what actual document he was signing said. Makes you wonder how much of the stuff he signs is actually being read by him.

It's certainly possible, you'd just have to recoup the extra R&D cost. Also, naval reactors are designed for minimum size, that's why they use highly enriched uranium. A reactor for low-grade fuel would be larger.
reactor size data
The Los Angeles-class submarines have about 35000 shp available, from a reactor compartment weighing an estimated 1600 tons. The Wartsila diesel from TFA has 100000 shp from 2300 tons. So the power density of a nuclear reactor is lower. You do save on fuel storage, though.

Back in the day, you could lose it by getting the clap too many times.
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/doctrine/dod/dod d-5210_42.htm/

This isn't about religion and its relationship to science. Its about a test that doesn't do what its supposed to do but still identifies large numbers of people as having lied.

See http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2001/042501_iacono .html, where an expert tells the Senate judiciary committee that "No spy has ever been uncovered because of a failed polygraph test", that "can learn to defeat these tests", and that, when tested, "innocent people fare little better than chance on these tests, with 40% or more failing on average".

See http://www.fas.org/sgp/eprint/sullivan.html, where another expert indicates (after criticizing the first for hyperbole) that one particular spy had been given at least three polygraph tests, passed them all, and "did more than 90 percent of the damage he did in the interval between his first and second tests." The witness goes on the real that he knows "of no security procedure that would have stopped" the spy's "first venture into espionage."

Good security is based in good research rather than faulty methodologies.

This isn't about religion and its relationship to science. Its about a test that doesn't do what its supposed to do but still identifies large numbers of people as having lied.

See http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2001/042501_iacono .html, where an expert tells the Senate judiciary committee that "No spy has ever been uncovered because of a failed polygraph test", that "can learn to defeat these tests", and that, when tested, "innocent people fare little better than chance on these tests, with 40% or more failing on average".

See http://www.fas.org/sgp/eprint/sullivan.html, where another expert indicates (after criticizing the first for hyperbole) that one particular spy had been given at least three polygraph tests, passed them all, and "did more than 90 percent of the damage he did in the interval between his first and second tests." The witness goes on the real that he knows "of no security procedure that would have stopped" the spy's "first venture into espionage."

Good security is based in good research rather than faulty methodologies.

That said, having taken a polygraph, I think the true value lies in the "good-cop/bad-cop" environment that it creates.

I. Introduction

        DOE's existing counterintelligence polygraph regulations are set
forth at 10 CFR part 709. Under section 3152(a) of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002, Pub. L. 107-107 (NDAA for FY
2002), DOE is obligated to prescribe revised regulations for a new
counterintelligence polygraph program the stated purpose of which is
``* * * to minimize the potential for release or disclosure of
classified data, materials, or information'' (42 U.S.C. 7383h-1(a).)
Section 3152(b) requires DOE to ``* * * take into account the results
of the Polygraph Review,'' which is defined by section 3152 (e) to mean
``* * * the review of the Committee to Review the Scientific Evidence
on the Polygraph of the National Academy of Sciences'' (42 U.S.C.
7383h-1(b), (e)).

SEC. 3152. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY COUNTERINTELLIGENCE POLYGRAPH PROGRAM.

(a) NEW COUNTERINTELLIGENCE POLYGRAPH PROGRAM REQUIRED.-The Secretary of Energy shall carry out, under regulations prescribed under this section, a new counterintelligence polygraph program for the Department of Energy. The purpose of the new program is to minimize the potential for release or disclosure of classified data, materials, or information.

(b) AUTHORITIES AND LIMITATIONS.-(1) The Secretary shall prescribe regulations for the new counterintelligence polygraph program required by subsection (a) in accordance with the provisions of subchapter II of

chapter 5 of title 5, United States Code (commonly referred to as the Administrative Procedures Act).

(2) In prescribing regulations for the new program, the Secretary shall take into account the results of the Polygraph Review.

(3) Not later than six months after obtaining the results of the Polygraph Review, the Secretary shall issue a notice of proposed rulemaking for the new program.

(c) REPEAL OF EXISTING POLYGRAPH PROGRAM.-Effective 30 days after the Secretary submits to the congressional defense committees the Secretarys certification that the final rule for the new counterintelligence

polygraph program required by subsection (a) has been fully implemented, section 3154 of the Department of Energy Facilities Safeguards, Security, and Counterintelligence Enhancement Act of 1999 (subtitle D of title XXI of Public Law 106-65; 42 U.S.C. 7383h) is repealed.

(d) REPORT ON FURTHER ENHANCEMENT OF PERSONNEL SECURITY PROGRAM.-(1) Not later than January 1, 2003, the Administrator for Nuclear Security shall submit to Congress a report setting forth the recommendations of the Administrator for any legislative action that the Administrator considers appropriate in order to enhance the personnel security program of the Department of Energy.

(2) Any recommendations under paragraph (1) regarding the use of polygraphs shall take into account the results of the Polygraph Review.

(e) POLYGRAPH REVIEW DEFINED.-In this section, the term "Polygraph Review" means the review of the Committee to Review the Scientific Evidence on the Polygraph of the National Academy of Sciences.

That looks a lot like a AN/FLR-9 (http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/an-flr-9.h tm).

The problem with DF-ing HF sites can be realized when you take a look at a FLR-9's or equivalent's antenna arrays: The wavelength of transmissions in the HF range are so long that a huge amount of space must be mapped-out between the receiving elements in order to produce sufficient phase-shift to generate an acceptably accurate line of bearing (LOB). This results in a very large, decidedly non-portable system that, in spite of its size and expense, will only generate a compass bearing, along which bearing the transmitter could be anywhere. You need a dead-minimum of TWO such facilities with AN/FLR-9s or the equivalent, geographically separated enough to create as close to a perpendicular LOB relative to the first as you can get. The width of a major continent will do nicely.

Unfortunately, a two-LOB fix is rarely used on its own, as there is no way to estimate the reliability of the fix. For that, you need at least ONE MORE site, itself just as geographically dispersed from the others, in order to create what is called an Elliptical Error Probablility, or EEP. I'm not going to attempt the math, but in a nutshell it's a circle drawn on the map within which the target transmitter has a certain chance of being found. EEPs range in confidence from 50-90%, depending upon the number of LOBs that can be taken upon a given target. The more LOBs taken, the higher the confidence and the smaller the size of the circle (not a job for the impatient).

Okay, now that's for your plain-vanilla HF transmitter with a plain-vanilla dipole antenna, sending a plain-vanilla carrier wave. Now, toss in a few rather interesting monkey-wrenches that folks can employ when they're not-too keen on being found: Troposcatter. Ionoscatter. Meteorscatter. Spread-spectrum. Hoppers. Things start getting fun at this point.

So, yes; in a way DF-ing a HF broadcast is 'simple,' as long as you have the BOO-KOO BUCKS required to construct, man, and maintain such a string of facilities, as well as the inter-site telecommunications network required to coordinate all operations.

NSA can do it. Me? Sorry; I already spent my lunch money for today. :)

Kim Jong Il has almost zero funds, and yet retains power by personality.

Kim's funds may be insignificant in absolute terms; but relatively speaking, while the rest of North Korea is totally dark, he has enough money left over after his cognac, Segways and iPods to fund a nuclear program.

The effect of money is more insidious and less visible than “blind devotion;” instances:

• the Catholic church (in the middle ages),
• Hollywood.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/dd_1847_1.pdf

Section 4: In consideration of being granted access to SCI and of being
assigned or retained in a position of special confidence and trust
requiring access to SCI, I hereby agree to submit for security review
by the Department or Agency that last authorized my access to such
information or material, any writing or other preparation in any form,
including a work of fiction, that contains or purports to contain any
SCI or description of activities that produce or relate to SCI or that I
  have reason to believe are derived from SCI,
that I contemplate disclosing to any person not authorized to have
access to SCI or that I have prepared for public disclosure. I
understand and agree that my obligation to submit such preparations
for review applies during the course of my access to SCI and
thereafter, and I agree to make any required submissions prior to
discussing the preparation with, or showing it to, anyone who is not
authorized to have access to SCI. I further agree that I will not
disclose the contents of such preparation to any person not
authorized to have access to SCI until I have received written
authorization from the Department or Agency that last authorized
my access to SCI that such disclosure is permitted.

A recent report from the secretive JASON scientific advisory group considers the feasibility of using microorganisms to produce fuels as a metabolic product, such as hydrogen or ethanol.

"Microorganisms present a great opportunity for energy science," the JASON report to the Department of Energy said.

"Microorganisms are simpler than plants; they have smaller genomes and proteomes, and are easier to manipulate and culture. The enormous biodiversity of microorganisms presents a broad palette of starting points for engineering. Microorganisms already make many metabolic products, some of which are useful fuels."

"Boosting the efficiency of fuel formation from microorganisms is an important research challenge for the twenty first century."

The JASONs do not publish even their unclassified reports in an orderly or consistent fashion. A copy of the new report was obtained by Secrecy News.

See "Engineering Microorganisms for Energy Production," JSR-05-300, June 23, 2006 (92 pages, 1.1 MB):

Would the people that determine the known list of terrorists be the same ones who were certain that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction?

That is very unlikely. Terrorism and Counter-proliferation are very different disciplines, requiring different knowledge bases and skills. WMD would be mainly CIA & DIA. Terrorism would be a different part of CIA & DIA, shared with FBI.

If it makes you feel any better, they did find a number of active, banned weapons programs in Iraq though, not to mention a few other surprises. It is clear that Saddam still had an interest, and was prepared to resume WMD activities as soon as sanctions were lifted. As to the actual weapons, maybe they really were all destroyed, or maybe they were transferred to Syria. We may never really know for sure.

Getting good intelligence on weapons development and counts of deployed weapons in authoritarian countries is a very difficult problem for intelligence agencies. It is by no means uncommon for major foreign weapons systems to be missed, their capabilities misjudged, or occasionally overstated. South Africa was an undeclared nuclear power for a time, and nobody actually knew until they announced that they had dismantled their weapons. China recently displayed a new type of attack submarine that took the US by surprise.

Kudos on the rhetorical device.

This is why sometimes countries get behind in technology. Instead of embracing the idea and seeing it as a challenge, they say, "nope no can do, too expensive, [insert excuse here]."

The Euro was introduced relatively quickly, and many other countries switched currencies without problems. In fact many countries regularly switch currencies without problems.

When you are required to change the change can be painful, but often it is for the better.

Or how about a conspiracy theory twist. MAYBE the Treasury does not want to switch the bills because it would cause financial chaos. http://www.fas.org/irp/gao/ggd96082.htm

Completely replacing a currency will mean accounting for all of the monies in circulation and that might prove problematic.

Yeah, because this isn't effective.

FTFA linked by grandparent:

The solid-rocket propelled "torpedo" achieves high speeds by producing a high-pressure stream of bubbles from its nose and skin, which coats the torpedo in a thin layer of gas and forms a local "envelope" of supercavitating bubbles

Gas. Not vacuum. The first thing I thought when I heard about the Shkval is "I wonder if the technology could be useful at ship-sized scales?", the first thing I thought when I saw the article here on slashdot was "Woo, supercavitating!"

FTFA linked by grandparent:

The solid-rocket propelled "torpedo" achieves high speeds by producing a high-pressure stream of bubbles from its nose and skin, which coats the torpedo in a thin layer of gas and forms a local "envelope" of supercavitating bubbles

Gas. Not vacuum. The first thing I thought when I heard about the Shkval is "I wonder if the technology could be useful at ship-sized scales?", the first thing I thought when I saw the article here on slashdot was "Woo, supercavitating!"

The Prairie/Masker has been used for a while to reduce the acoustical signature of ships conducting anti-submarine warfare.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/navy/docs/swos/stu2 /NEWIS9_7.html
Some people will confuse the idea of bubbles with cavitation. Cavitation is loud and is avoided but it is caused when a screw manages to cause a phase change. The water turns to vapor and the the bubble collapses making a lot of sound and can even erode the metal on the screw.
The bubble of air that the navy uses don't collapse so no noise instead it acts like an insulator.

I wonder if you could use the exhaust gases of the ship for the bubbles for shipping application? You would have to cool the gas first but it might be a bit if a free lunch.

The idea of air cavities has much in common with supercavitation, in which a submerged object such as a torpedo creates a single large bubble around itself. This slashes skin friction, bringing remarkable speeds within reach (New Scientist, 22 July 2000, p 26). Perhaps not surprisingly, Russian engineers who first developed supercavitating torpedoes have not only done plenty of research on air-cavity lubrication for ships, but have also put their ideas to work.

refers to: Shkval. Scared the bejesus out of the U.S. Navy.

Encryption was moved from the Munitions list to the Commerce list in 1996 "because of the increasingly widespread use of encryption products for the legitimate protection of the privacy of data and communications in nonmilitary contexts"

"November 15, 1996: Encryption products that presently are or would be designated in Category XIII of the United States Munitions List and regulated by the Department of State pursuant to the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778 et seq.) shall be transferred to the Commerce Control List,"

http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo_crypt_9611_memo. htm

NASDA, the Japanese space agency that has morphed into JAXA, successfully tested a protoype. The program has been canceled due to lack of funding. JAXA intends to use the experimental data and the design schematics for this prototype to develop a manned space plane.

Did the United Force Air Force somehow "borrow" the Japanese experimental data and design schematics to develop the American version of an unmanned space plane?

The flying "anti-satellite" laser that the DOD has is packed in a commercial-airliner-sized jet, and a good portion of that space is taken up by energy storage.

The flying "anti-satellite" laser that the DOD has is packed in a commercial-airliner-sized jet, but a good portion of that space is not taken up by energy storage. It's a chemical laser, which means that it's a system that basically is there to mix some compounds. When they mix, they lase; the output is then simply focussed and aimed. A good portion of the space is taken up with chemical storage.

If you want some information on a partially declassified DOD laser weapon test bed, check this out. They don't tell you how powerful it is, but it's "megawatt-class".

I want five megawatts by mid-May!

Anyway in theory, you could use this technology (when miniaturized) to build handheld laser rifles, but they would still have cartridges and ammunition and not batteries. I don't think that the theoretical maximum energy storage density of batteries is even enough to provide sufficient output to make a practical weapon based on them in the theoretical best case.

["

Zbigniew Brzezinski, national security adviser to former President Jimmy Carter, brought Dr. Gates to the White House from the CIA as a Soviet specialist.

'I think the Gates appointment is the best appointment that President Bush has made in the course of his six years in office,' Mr. Brzezinski said.

'I co-chaired with him [Dr. Gates] two years ago a study on American policy towards Iran.

'He is a remarkably intelligent, responsible and balanced individual whose judgment can be trusted and whose common sense is reassuring. This appointment may be marking the beginning of a major corrective in American policy towards the Middle East.'

Mr. Bush said Dr. Gates will bring a 'fresh perspective' to the Defense Department

"]

Jim Landers, "Gates well-armed for tough job", The Dallas Morning News, November 9, 2006

Of course we should not forget that Dr. Gates had a full chapter in the Walsh Iran/Contra report.

As for McCain's chances; if i was making the line, it would start at about 15:1, and i'd gladly take all of the sucker money coming down on him. His play for the right-side hasn't endeared him to the hard-right Republicans, and has alienated him from the independents. As for my take: He's no Bary Goldwater...

Your ex-mayor has even less chance than McCain. Did you see the NatRev cover of him about two months ago?

They're working on it, and that document is nine years old.

Personally I believe this was all politics.
The facts:
1. They announce Rumsfeld stepping down after the senate/house of representative/state elections.
2. Mr. Gates seems to me as he is another Bush insider. He worked for Bush Sr. and now is assisting Bush Jr.
3. Mr. Gates owns or has high interests in Fidelity Investments, he was on the board of directors of NACCO Industries, Inc., Brinker International, Inc. and Parker Drilling Company, Inc.
4. He also has interest in the Middle East. Although he wasn't indicted in the Iran-Contra scandal, it seems evident that he played an important role in in this scandal. He also has a history of lying if you digg some more information on him.

Sources: http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/walsh/chap_16.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Gates

Robert M. Gates was the Central Intelligence Agency's deputy director for intelligence (DDI) from 1982 to 1986. He was confirmed as the CIA's deputy director of central intelligence (DDCI) in April of 1986 and became acting director of central intelligence in December of that same year. Owing to his senior status in the CIA, Gates was close to many figures who played significant roles in the Iran/contra affair and was in a position to have known of their activities.

Bob Gates was heavily involved in the treasonous Iran/Contra affair.

The names may change, but the characters remain the same.

http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/walsh/chap_16.htm

South Africa wants two, that's right

South Africa already had nuclear weapons and gave them up.

Bullshit. Someone else apparently wants to rewrite history.

Iraq: U.N. Inspections for Weapons of Mass Destruction (Updated October 7, 2003) (pdf format) Note particularly that while the inspections were taking place, and cooperation was good, the ONLY areas of contention were some ambiguities in Iraqi documents as far what was listed and what was shown.

Further, here is what ELBaradei is quoted as saying:

Director General ElBaradei reported that inspections since November 2002 have identified no prohibited nuclear activities but urged states to continue to provide intelligence information. ElBaradei specifically suggested that the inspection process "should be allowed to run its natural course" and that credible assurances could be provided within the next few months.

Inspector's Call U.S. Tips 'Garbage'

Iraq was wasn't justified, U.N. weapons experts say (note the lies that Dick Cheney perpetuated)

UN Inspection in Iraq Was No Sham

Shall I continue or would you like to keep repeating lies?

How (precisely) does someone get to the point of knowing enough about developing nukes that his notes are classified as sensitive, without actually trying to build those nukes himself?

Ask Japan.

The definition of dictator is a : a person granted absolute emergency power; b : one holding complete autocratic control; c : one ruling absolutely and often oppressively.

While you could argue whether Bush, technically, meets the definition, there is plenty of evidence that he is trying to evade Congressional oversight, elimination of habeas corpus for detainees and immunity for torture, the use of signing statements to effectively nullify legislation, NSA spying on U.S. citizens and so forth that are clearly moves in that direction.

Further, he is definitely claiming power and using it based on a framework of emergency that goes by the label of the "war on terror". He, and especially people under him like Cheney, believe that that the President, as Commander-in-Chief, has the authority to disregard virtually all previously known legal boundaries. That's pretty close to an understanding that believes itself to have absolute emergency power, i.e., a dictatorship - given certain conditions (which in this case are vague).

There used to be a policy that all military suppliers had to have a second source. Because the US electronics industry was strong, there was no problem finding American suppliers. If the commies bombed one capacitor factory, there was always another one somewhere to keep the army supplied with capacitors. That changed. I remember one system that used tubes (the transistor version was coming 'next year' for about twenty years). By the end of the system's life the only supplier of tubes was the USSR.

I think it is wise that the military can identify every line of code it uses and, if necessary, talk directly to its author. The extent to which foreign spies will go is almost infinite. My favorite example is the US embassy in Moscow. http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1990_cr/h901026-em bassy.htm They had to tear it down because the Soviets managed to build bugs into almost every room.

Congressional Research Service Report for Congress, "The Use of Federal Troops for Disaster Assistance: Legal Issues," by Jennifer K. Elsea, Legislative Attorney, August 14, 2006

I never thought that the "4x4" designation for "all wheel drive" cars made any sense, either.

I never thought that the "4x4" designation for "all wheel drive" cars made any sense, either.

Also, the Koreans have been known to haul around trains full of ANFO... It wouldn't be hard for them to hide it. Because the media does not report on it, few Americans know of the N. Koreans massive underground infrastructure, but they have the capability to do something like this fairly easily.

Late last July, an American Army officer and I rented a Korean People's Army helicopter -- $1,000 in cash in US dollars per hour. We needed to check the procedures for emergency medical evacuation by helicopter in case one of the US or North Korean soldiers searching for US Korean War remains was injured. We flew from Pyongyang north to an air base just south of the Chongjong River near Yongbyon, then east along the Chongjong River and north again to an area southwest of Unsan. Our flight took us very close to the area where the satellite photographs reportedly spotted a large construction site.

Nothing seemed unusual. The North Korean government did not seem concerned that we might spot some secret construction site, otherwise they would not have let us fly. Coal mines and a few factory towns dotted the landscape. Sometimes smoke came out of a mountainside, and roads seemed to disappear into a hillside. Probably these where places where factories had been built inside mountains. In North Korea, this is normal.

Also be sure to read the comments of a N. Korean defector. What's most interesting is the fact that they have been in a virtual state of war readiness since the 1970's. They've been preparing for a war for 35 years! That means trenches, underground bunkers (and not concrete in sand ala Iraq, these are carved into GRANITE MOUNTAINS), caves, tunnels, massive anti-aircraft batteries, etc.

There's a reason we aren't messing with N. Korea--we would lose! We should just let China and the rest of the region deal with their neighbor. My opinion.

Of the 535 members of the house and senate, a total of two percent, meaning twelve members, have, or have had, children in Iraq or Afghanistan...I think based on the numbers I can safely assert that our nation's leaders have put this country on a war footing but are not going out on a limb with their own children.

U.S. armed forces currently stand at about 1.4 million strong. Even if we were to ramp back up to the Cold War readiness levels, that is 2.0 million (at a cost of about $1.5 billion per 10,000 personnel, that is a huge ramp up). The adult, military age (the 15-40 cohort) population of the United States is approximately 160 million (take the 15-64 cohort of about 200 million, then subtract out all cohorts above 40). The representation of the general population in the armed forces is therefore 1.4:160, or 0.875%.

Back out about 10 million as a wild-assed guess for people in the general population who are unsuitable for the armed forces (NIH estimates about 6% of entire population exhibit severe mental health problems, so perhaps this might account for about 6 million within the military age cohort ineligible for military service). So about 150 million in the general population are eligible (physically and mentally, not talking about political/religious/ethical disposition) for military service with some quick back of the envelope calculations. That puts the general population representation in the U.S. armed forces at 1.4:150, or 0.933%. If you increase the size of the armed forces to Cold War levels the representation of the general population goes to 1.333%. If you decrease the available pool of eligible volunteers by another 20 million down to 130 million and increase the force levels to 2.0 million, that puts the general population representation at 1.539%. The actual, precise general population numbers might budge by a few million here or there, but that is only going to move the ratio by a few fractions of a percent as you can see.

At 2.243% representation within the armed forces, the elected national representative leaders are anywhere from about 50% to over 100% over-represented when compared to their constituents, depending upon your demographic assumptions. I assert that as long as you are going to run the comparisons, as a representative republic, comparing per capita representation in the armed forces between the national leadership's children and the general population is an entirely appropriate manner to judge the overall relative commitment of either group to backing up their war rhetoric with sharing the burdens of war. It is impractical to throw your leadership of military age en masse into a war effort, but if you believed that you would have come out and said it; instead, you focused on the rate of enlistment of the adult age children of the leadership.

This is all assuming you accept the premise (which you apparently do, because that is the foundation of your assertion when you are counting the progeny of the leadership who enlist) that the individual choice of a legally recognized adult (even as young as 18) to join the military, which translates into a familial burden, counts as a commitment. Other posters have sagely pointed out that congressional members have no legal right to force their adult age children to either join or not join the armed forces. If it does count as a commitment of the leadership, it likely does so only in a very loose manner. Probably best to focus on what the legislative leadership can directly control to measure their commitment to the war, which is the legislation and funding of the war effort. Now, if you had claimed the leadership is showing more commitment to a war than the general population as a basis for an argument that the war has no popular support, these numbers migh

Under the 1994 Agreed Framework an international consortium is building two proliferation-proof nuclear reactors and providing fuel oil for North Korea while the reactors are being built.

That's right, a 1994/1995 agreement. Clinton in office again. But you'd rather blame Bush through Rumsfeld.

Oh and you know from personal experience that all directors on a company's BoD knows all about what is going on? News flash: A large portion of them sit there for the money and don't give a rat's ass what happens otherwise. What you fail to note is that the company was a European engineering giant based in Zurich. Also:

The reactor deal was part of President Bill Clinton's policy of persuading the North Korean regime to positively engage with the west. ...In a statement to the American magazine Newsweek, his spokeswoman Victoria Clarke said that there "was no vote on this". A spokesman for ABB told the Guardian yesterday that "board members were informed about the project which would deliver systems and equipment for light water reactors".

So there was no vote, and the directors were not told they were selling nuclear reactors, despite the headline.

2002: Bush names N Korea part of the "Axis of Evil"
So what? Are you unaware of NK's actions over the preceeding two decades? Clearly. It isn't like Bush pulled the idea that NK was bad out of his ass. Do somethign intelligent, do real research. Did you know NK ha dbeen on the list of terroist sponsoring and aiding states fo ryears prior to 2000, let alone 2002?

Educate youself:
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/dprk/nuke/index.html

U.S. Defense Secretary William Cohen cited North Korea as "the most significant near-term danger" in Asia in his 2000 annual defense report submitted to U.S. President Clinton and Congress. The report focused on the Taepo Dong-2 ballistic missile threat and the possibility that the missile could strike most parts of the United States.

-- http://www.isis-online.org/publications/dprk/book/ chronology3.html#0200

Because of their dedication to spreading nuclear and chemical technology and pursuing a nuclear weapons program on top of it. One that predates Bush by nearly a decade. China isn't too happy about NK and it's nuke program either. They are concerned that it will trigger Japan to develop their own, or SK to allow US nukes back in.

2005: Bush violates 6-way deal with N Korea to abandon it's nuke programme by freezing N Korean financial connections and branding it a criminal state

Every wonder why or just assume you know the intimate details of the goings on?

2005

14 January: North Korea says it is willing to restart stalled talks on its nuclear programme, according to the official KCNA news agency.

19 January: Condoleezza Rice, President George W Bush's nominee as secretary of state, identifies North Korea as one of six "outposts of tyranny" where the US must help bring freedom.

10 February: North Korea says it is suspending its participation in the talks over its nuclear programme for an "indefinite period", blaming the Bush administration's intention to "antagonise, isolate and stifle it at any cost". The statement also repeats North Korea's assertion to have built nuclear weapons for self-defence.

18 April: South Korea says North Korea has shut down its Yon

During Operation Desert Storm the Iraqi Air Force did not seek to challenge Coalition air forces, and nearly half the Iraqi Air Force fled to Iran to escape destruction. Why the IQAF fled to Iran is not precisely known, and the answer may never be fully known. In any case, Iraqi fighters and support aircraft fled for the border -- more than 120 left.

During Operation Desert Storm the Iraqi Air Force did not seek to challenge Coalition air forces, and nearly half the Iraqi Air Force fled to Iran to escape destruction. Why the IQAF fled to Iran is not precisely known, and the answer may never be fully known. In any case, Iraqi fighters and support aircraft fled for the border -- more than 120 left.

Yeah, I could say all of those things, but the fact remains that we have dropped 120,000+ soliders and $300+ billion into a foreign country to interdict nuclear weapons that did not and do no exist

Yet another Slashbot demonstrates his ignorance of set theory. The search was not specifically for nuclear weapons, but for weapons of mass destruction. This is a more general category that includes chemical, biological, and radiological weapons as well as nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons are a subset of WMD; a lack of nuclear weapons in some location does not imply a lack of WMD. Read this and educate yourself.

One would think that a mathematically-inclined audience such as this would be less likely to make such deductive errors; such flawed reasoning is what you would typically expect from the social "sciences," humanities, or liberal arts crowd.

(There's also the possibility that you intentionally set up the "no nukes found in Iraq" strawman so that you could then knock it down, but it's not always wise to attribute to malice that which can be explained by ignorance.)

At this moment, US intel claims it "can't confirm" the event. However, US geologists apparently can. Transparency is a good thing, especially when it's not intended.


Even more convincing is the location of the tremmor and the location of the North Korean Missle launch facility. I did some Google searching on known missle sites and a missle site is nearby. Of note when checking the USGS data on the tremmor, note the depth in relation to other events in the area that have happened in the past.

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/dprk/facility/nodong -1.htm