Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Makes Plans for GPS Shutdown
sailforsingapore writes "Apparently, President Bush is drawing up plans to disable sections of the GPS network in the event of a terrorist attack. The rationale seems to be that it would prevent said terrorists from using the GPS system to direct some sort of attack. The plan would shut down access not only to the GPS satellite network, but projects like the EU's Galileo. Ironically, this comes alongside the President's plan to strengthen the GPS network against deliberate jamming."
Both actions make GPS harder to use as a weapon by our enemies.
It can always be turned back on when the threat has passed, or selectively turned on at specific times to allow for a strategic response.
Running with Linux for over 20 years!
What is ironic about controlling when your technology can and cannot be used. It seems like a system for shutting it down when necessary would go hand in hand with a system for making sure other's can't shut it down arbitrarily.
My Photography - http://ian-x.com
The Deathlings (comic) - http://thedeathlings.com
When Clinton allowed for more accurate GPS signals to be used by civilians, it sure seemed like they just flipped a switch one day and it was suddenly more accurate for everyone...
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
Demand for compases and maps have gone up 80%.
The road between democracy and tyranny is paved with secrecy in the name of security.
They seemed to locate everything just fine on 9/11 w/o any GPS...
In the event of a terroist attack, cause large scale panic by shutting down a primary means of navigation.
What's next? Cutting off electricity so that the terrorists can't use it against people?
Instead of disabling portions of it, why not just give it a rolling encryption that the terrorists cannot decipher for a period of time greater than the duration of the attack? With our troops and weaponry increasingly dependent on the technology, the outcome could be much worse for us in that we could be left completely unable to respond to the attack. If we're going to think ahead, then let's really think about it!
"Can there be a Klein bottle that is an efficient and effective beer pitcher?"
Mostly terrorist attacks occur quickly and without warning, and by the time the authorities gets a clue about what is going on, the attack most likely is over - as per 9/11. Shutting down the GPS network in such an event would only make it infinitely harder for rescue workers and police to coordinate relief efforts.
So after the attack, Bush is going to shut down the GPS system? How does that help anyone? Making it stronger against jamming is certainly a worthwhile pursuit, but shutting it down in response to a terrorist attack is just liable to have people wandering around lost, if not actively hindering rescue operations in fly-by-instrument situations.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
The ability to selectively disable the network has long been a feature though usually it's spoken of in terms of disabling it over a (non-USA) battlefield. The govt. would be stupid to do this in all but the most serious emergency and then only for the shortest possible time.
I wonder what the per-hour or per-day economic impact of disabling GPS over a heavily poplulated USA region?
A decent number of aircraft/airports that use GPS approaches would have to go back to more primitive instrument landings (more delays); many trucking/shipping companies rely on GPS for tracking goods. Then there are surveyers and agriculture and such that may use GPS augmented with some local beacon for high accuracy.
What other key economic uses of GPS are there?
from what i recall gps guided smart bombs have been used for quite a while now.
though missiles aren't the only use for gps. there are many military applications for qps. just letting your troops know where they are make it easier for them to call in air or artillery support, or just coordinate an attack with other troops. basically any reason a civillian finds gps useful is also useful for military purposes
Off topic, perhaps, but am I the only one that starts seeing parallels betwen USA/Bush vs Star Wars/The Emperor? It might be just my imaginations and/or one of my mood-swings, but things are getting scary "over there". . . .
This message has been ROT-13 encrypted twice for higher security.
WAAS was demilitarized some time ago. This allows for much greater accuracy.
Read more about it
http://www.garmin.com/aboutGPS/waas.html
What about the growing number of airports that use GPS-only instrument approaches? Geezsh, why doesn't he just shut down the VOR and NDB systems while he's at it.
Besides, a Determined Terrorist could build their own ground-based DGPS-like system for specific targets without too much difficulty.
GPS is free to use (once you've got a handset), and there really is no value in reproducing it except to protect ourselves when our interests do not align with those of Mr Bush or whoever Diebold elects in the future.
The US and EU reached and agreement over mutual jamming capabilities:
These technical parameters will allow either side to effectively jam the other's signal in a small area, such as a battlefield, without shutting down the entire system.
And we're supposed to believe the President has a plan to harden security for the entire system?
The man can barely tie his own shoes!
It makes no mention of "how" they plan to do this. The mechanism could easily be simply to contact the EU, and, if neccesary present evidence that there will be a terrorist attack.
The EU and US may not get on with each other that well, but they're not going to be so churlish as to allow people to be killed by terrorists.
Does the Whitehouse know that GPS is essential to timing many things such as the power grid?
I'm guessing this is some off the wall PR stunt to make people feel better that they can turn of GPS in an instant but the real facts are you can't shut down most of the sats unless they are in range of one of the few control stations and even then it might be a one way trip for some of the older ones.
Turning off GPS might just wipe out a great deal of mobile phones and other communications. It would be bad for aviation as well because one its turned off, there is no reason to ever turn it back on as far as pilots are concerned. And there is that small problem that the Europeans are building Galileo and the Russians still have GLONASS.
After seeing what Airbus is doing to Boeing and all the other military messes, I'm wondering who the politicians are working for because I know its not for the tax payers.
Hard copy maps and, in extreme emergencies, stop and ask for directions?
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
Attempting to disable Galileo/GLONASS when the EU or Russia is not attacking might be considered a hostile act.
If there is another significant terrorist attack inside the U.S., don't you think it would be too late for shutting down the GPS network to help anything?
The only way this would be useful would be if the government knew an attack was imminent, and knew the attackers were relying on GPS, and was so sure of their knowledge that they were willing to disrupt air traffic, shipping, traveling salesmen, and everyone trying to find their way to a party. In short, I think the likelihood of this ever being used is low, and the likelihood of it actually helping protect against terrorism is near zero.
I think this capability makes more sense as a bargaining chip to threaten other countries with in trade negotiations. Their commerce depends on the GPS system, too.
If stupidity got us into this mess, then why can't it get us out? - Will Rogers
So a "terrorist" attacks the US, and we respond by stranding millions of drivers, hikers, travellers and emergency workers without their GPS to help them get to safety. SUDDENLY AND WITHOUT WARNING. Isn't this GPS shutdown Osama's dream come true? What else can this criminal asshole do to fan the flames of fear and destroy our country?
--
make install -not war
Hmm. I looked up GPS in Wikipedia, and found this:
"The system is used by countless civilians as well, who can use the GPS's Standard Positioning Service worldwide free of charge. [...]
On May 1, 2000, US President Bill Clinton announced that this "Selective Availability" would be turned off. However, for military purposes, "Selective Deniability" may still be used to, in effect, jam civilian GPS units in a war zone or global alert while still allowing military units to have full functionality. European concern about this and commercial issues has resulted in the planned GALILEO positioning system. Russia already operates an independent system called GLONASS (global navigation system), although with only 12 active satellites as of 2004, the system is of limited usefulness."
Seems like the article was just yet another opportunity for people to mention "President Bush", "terrorism" and "WE'RE OUTRAGED!!!1111" in the same thread.
Help savingAmigaOS and a free PowerPC market
What about all the other users? Ships and aircraft which may be relying on it? Public road users trying to find their way home? Its just asking to get more people pissed off with the US.. particularly since this system will block others systems like Galileo without permission..
That was the original intention, however the US threw a strop over the fact that they couldn't blackout chunks of galileo (probably thanks to US threats to destroy the satellites if they couldn't turn them off). The EU caved over the issue and agreed to "harmonise the technology of the networks" - essentially, Galileo will work in sync with GPS and the US blackout of GPS will work on Galileo
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed -- and hence clamorous to be led to safety -- by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.-- H.L. Mencken
Physics is like sex: sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it.
Imagine some terrorist group is launching a dozen of home-made of cruise missile towards Washington. Bush has every reason to shut down the GPS. It makes sense to ask EU for a favour to shut down Galileo temporarily.
The problem is the Bush Administration is just so arrogant. The Pentagon has plan to do whatever, regardless of what they say they would or wouldn't do. I don't have a problem with this. But, that does not mean it is rational to threat the supposely allied EU countries for an attack of Galileo... Let's turn the table around. Imagine what would be Bush's reaction if the French Government say that kind of crap first....
I don't even need to mention other sovereignty countries... It is clear why Bush is hated by so many people around the world.
<rant delivery="sarcastic" offtopic="slightly">
Yeah, this is perfectly logical. Everyone knows that only terrorists would be using GPS during a terrorist attack, and not, say, emergency workers, the FBI, etc. God forbid that a single terrorist be allowed to use the GPS network, regardless of the fact that he's probably already (a) planned for that contingency (esp. since the Bush administration has helpfully announced the fact that the GPS system might be killed at will) or (b) already done all the legwork with GPS while picking his targets and coordinating the attack (so that he can execute the attack without it).
In fact, I also applaud the Bush administration for restricting our freedoms to eliminate the risk that any of the pesky terrorists might receive some. Freedom is a limited resource and must be hoarded and parceled out accordingly, and we can't afford to waste our freedoms (e.g. 1st amendment freedom of assembly, 5th and 6th amendment right to a fair trial) on even a single terrorist. I commend Bush for indefinitely detaining even suspected terrorists at our luxurious Guantanamo Bay facility (which is far nicer than they deserve, let me tell you), because we can't risk a terrorist experiencing our freedoms. God forbid, we might actually have to let one go due to lack of evidence. Terrorists eat babies! We can't let baby-eaters go free! WON'T SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?!?
</rant>
Range Voting: preference intensity matters
Terrorists tend to be very clever, sly and intelligent people. They work with limited resources, frequently in enemy territory against a much larger force.
Terrorists will not rely on GPS.
The military is increasing its' reliance on GPS.
therefore
Shutting down the GPS will have no negative effect on the terrorists, but will hamper the military (and probably civil emergency efforts too).
Finally, if the terrorists do mount an attack on us that somehow utilises GPS, it is unlikely we will know about it until after it has happened.
What about the required integration of E911 & AGPS?
Wouldn't this affect the usability of this?
Just in case you need to know. Plans usually include things such as:
When - When would it be shut down
Why - Why would it be shut down
Where - Which areas would be shut down
How - How do we shut it down, and how do we operate without it.
Get a free ipod.
I think that a couple of hundred thousand people in the skies in planes that no longer know where they are may well get very pissed off... And personally, I DO care what happens to them...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
You really shouldn't make statments you know nothing about. As a licensed pilot I can assure you that there are backup systems for everything...exactly how do you think people flew planes before there was a GPS system?
It seems to me that the efforts of emergency responders could well be hampered by lack of information, particularly if the information network were shutdown. This includes GPS information. You can never know for certain who will be in a critical position to relay important information. If they don't have it, the system won't be able to respond effetively. (eg, "I just saw a gasoline tanker truck going by at 85 mph down this lonely highway - where am I? I dunno, my GPS isn't working."
A similar characterization could be made of the cell phone network: shutting it down could prevent the kind of remote activated explosives such as the ones used in 3/11 in Madrid, but, at the same time, people needing help or calling the authorities to tell them about a suspicious character fleeing the scene would also be hampered.
There needs to be more thoughtful critical analysis going into security measures and less heavy-handed measures based on fear and knee-jerk reactions.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
Galileo, OTOH, is not owned by the US, and it strikes me that it's extremely unlikely that the US government will ever get root on the Galileo satellite network. Therefore, disabling Galileo for a particular area would require brute force approaches: physical destruction of the satellites, which would have knock-on political effects that I would hope even Bush would balk at, or else on-the-spot jammers.
Either way, preventing a rogue state like, say, Canada from access to Galileo would require significantly more committment than with GPS: you would actually need to manipulate the real world. It would also take a considerable amount of time.
This is a just a plan folks. It's like posting an article stating that the government has a plan to shoot down commercial airliners that have been hijacked and are heading for large population centers, and the responses here would be "What is the government going to randomly shoot down airplanes now? I hate the government. Don't they know that foreigners fly on those planes, that could be an act of war? Air travel is a major commercial enterprise, is anyone thinking about how this could criple the economy? Sometimes they transport organs for transplant on those planes, just think about the people who would die? I love those little jet trails in the sky, why does the government want to take them away from me? Has anyone thought about the children? The children!" Stop overreacting, RTFA, and realize IT IS JUST A PLAN. This is what government bureaucracies do... they create massive amounts of paper.
...shutdown of the network inside the United States would come under only the most remarkable circumstances
For those of you who didn't RTFA, here are some key points from it.
- President Bush has ordered plans
- Any shutdown of the network inside the United States. Use GLONASS if you like.
- Any government-ordered shutdown or jamming of the GPS satellites would be done in ways to limit disruptions to navigation and related systems outside the affected area, the White House said.
-
There have been some good question and points raised (like HOW will this work), but those are barely audible over the Bush-bashing trolls and the general knee-jerk hysteria.
Long live the paranoid.
And everyone who cannot distinguish shades of gray and can only deal in absolutes, join this guy in his misguided cynicism.
> The EU and US may not get on with each other that well,
> but they're not going to be so churlish as to allow
> people to be killed by terrorists.
That is the sensible and pragmatic way to view this, and the way real-world diplomacy usually works out. Except that the current administration wouldn't put it in such cooperative and non-threatening language, without the possibility to flex muscle. Usually it starts with sneers and "Old Europe" masked by coughs, only to later degenerate into "hey, old buddy" and "could you spare a few thou troops".
One could just follow the road and, say, go by signs and a map
Try reading those roadsigns from a plane.... Oh that's right, this is Slashdot where if a single solution doesn't solve every problem it doesn't solve any problems.
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
Yes, you do, because that's way more important to the US than the impact of a terrorist attack. You need to have friends if you want a healthy economy, and a healthy economy is of much bigger importance on the average person's life than preventing terrorism.
Unfortunately, people have a really skewed perception of risk.
On 9/11 , about 2800 people (exact number is still unclear) suffered a terrible death in the terrorist attacks. Yes it was horrible. No, we don't want it to happen again.
However, the current measures taken by the US government are going way too far, it's not worth reducing freedom for in any way whatsoever, the risk of being killed in a terrorist attack is extremely small. Yet, somehow, the perception of this risk is inflated enormously.
To put things in perspective, last year there were 41,600 traffic deaths in the U.S. (15,700 alcohol related).
It seems clear to me that unsafe driving and DUI is a MUCH bigger risk to the US people than a 9/11 style terrorist attack.
The amount of money and effort spent on "the war on terrorism" is way out of proportion in relation to the risk involved. At the same time, I hear nothing about a "war on unsafe driving" or a "war on DUI", on the contrary, the government even seems to be promoting the use of SUV's which are proven to be more unsafe then 'regular' cars.
The american people should wake up, kick the idiot out of the Big Chair(tm), and put someone there who has his/her priorities straight.
I can understand shutting it down or turning back on the "built in inaccuracy" or whatever if they SUSPECT a terrorist attack is about to happen and they know they are using GPS. But the way this is worded, that in the event OF a terrorist attack GPS would be shut down, seems to me that we would be WITHOUT GPS in the immediate aftermath of a terrorist attack!
This is incredibly shortsighted, let me give you a good example: In the immediate aftermath of Hurricane Charley, cellphones, telephones and existing radio systems were down in the areas hardest hit, but amateur radio operators swarmed the area and deployed new antennas and crank up towers and tons of radios for the first responders. In addition to that they deployed this amazing technology called APRS for the salvation army and others that allowed the participating groups to track in realtime the location of all of their vehicles.
Now, if your not familiar with APRS, it starts with a low powered radio, a GPS unit, and a device that hooks up to the GPS and the radio that transmits the GPS coordinates in digital format on the radio. Then, ideally, a central radio tower can hear these signals and develop a picture of where all the signals are based off of their GPS coordinates. Whats even more insane is that APRS has grown so much that satellites and even the international space station repeat and broadcast APRS signals!
So if GPS were shut down first responders would lose a valuable emergency coordination resource. Not to mention the fact that some police/fire already have similar systems in place, though generally such systems are wiped out in disasters, hence the amateur radio operators who are at the ready to redeploy communications gear.
Read more:
More on APRS
APRS on the ISS
Amateur Radio Emergency Communication
...unfortunately no one can be told what The Mat^H^H^HGoatse is...they must experience it for themselves...
I work in the Testing & Evaluation of WAAS. WAAS and Selective Availability are not the same (or opposites). WAAS was never "militarized".
When Clinton ordered for the switch to be flipped (so to speak), what was done was the disabling of Selective Availability, which was a purposeful degradation of the civilian GPS signal (L1). The military had (and still has) a second (encrypted) signal that a military receiver must have a key to properly use (L2). Using that signal enhances their accuracy, whether or not Selective Availability is active.
WAAS (Wide Area Augmentation System) is something else. WAAS uses Geostationary Satellites to enhance (augment) GPS accuracy & precision in the USA. Not all GPS receivers use WAAS. Accuracy of a WAAS receiver is increased in either case (that is, with or without Selective Availability) relative to a non-WAAS receiver, but there is a noticeable difference from SA.
Not all GPS receivers use WAAS, but Selective Availability has been disabled, which affects all GPS receivers.
This seems stupid to me even when just looking at the military's own needs, let alone the needs of the police, aviation, etc.
I remember watching a special on the Discovery Channel (or maybe it was History? doesn't matter) that did an interview with an Air Force guy whose job it was to scout around on the ground, call in airstrikes on a location, and paint the target with a laser so that the planes could take it out with laser guided munitions.
He would take a GPS reading of his current location, then use a laser range finder, an electronic compass, and a bit of math to come up with a lat/long reading for the target, which was usually several kilometres away. This would get the planes in the right spot and once they were there the laser guidance would do the rest.
Problem was, the US issue GPS they gave him was HUGE. We are talking the size of a ham radio here, weighing around five pounds or perhaps more. Nobody in that job uses the issued GPS. Instead they order a civilian GPS and use that instead because they are tiny and weigh as much as a ham sandwich and not as much a ham radio.
I'm sure there are plenty of other military people out there doing the same thing. If they turn off civilian GPS altogether they might just be screwing their own troops.
Mechanik
I can't imagine its too difficult to find the two tallest buildings in NYC without GPS.
This is not the sig you are looking for...
I'd imagine Emergency Services are quite chuffed with GPS. E911, for example.
But hey, perhaps it's also a "good idea" to stop ambulances from going onto the streets in the aftermath of a terrorist attack. After all, the "terrrsts" might just hijack an ambulance and use it against us! Ph3ar!
SCO employee? Check out the bounty
There is the slight problem that VOR's are being phased out and ones in remote areas are no longer repaired if they go silent. While there currently are probably enough running to act as proper navaids should GPS fail completely, we continue to rely more and more on the convenient GPS system and let the backups fall into darkness. At least most of the ATR's still have AM Radio DF equipment onboard, lets the captain listen to Rush while finding his way to the next large city.
Public safety agencies rely increasingly upon GPS-based vehicle tracking -- in fact, federal authorities tended to encourage this in the weeks after 9/11/2001 with their hightened concerns about the possibilites that terrorists could steal emergency vehicles and use them as weapons. Moreover, Phase II Wireless 9-1-1 systems have been developed around the principle that metdata from GPS-enabled mobile handsets would help guide rescuers to those who need help. It seems to me that if the terrorists were to succeed in getting us to take down our GPS system, it could actually *produce* chaos and casualties over and above those that might be inflicted directly by an attack.
...disavow all knowledge...
I don't know about being a cynic, but as far as only dealing in absolutes -- he's certainly got the Commander in Chief in his corner.
-Turkey
For a "terrorist" attack, you dont realy need to have percision guidance.
IIRC, the Nazi V1 and V2 rockets had piss poor navigational abilities. On a 500 mile flight path, they had accuaracy of about 5miles. Which is compleatly unacceptable if you are trying to take out a tank, or even a very large building. But, since London is more then 5mi accross, they hit something. They were very scary. Londoners were scared, possibly even to the point of being terrified.
While I doubt that you could go down to your local university library and get plans for a V1, I think it is within the reach of just about anyone to build a rocket of V1 capabilities in 2004.
And how is shutting down GPS going to prevent a suitcase nuke attack?
What do you mean our enemies? I dont have any enemies. Who is it exactly that is your enemy anyway? Are they your enemy because Rumsfield told you so?
The whole US/THEM mentality is such a sad dementia. When will people learn? Its just people trying to get by.
--- Ban humanity.
By the time they get authorization to shut down GPS, the attack will most likely already be over.
All the 911 attacks happened in less than an hour. The Madrid bombings were within five minutes of each other. Apart from these major events, most terrorist attacks tend to be independent with no warning or follow-up attacks.
Also, for how long are they going to keep GPS offline until they decide it's 'safe' to turn it on again? A day? A week? When the threat level goes green? Never?
that's what powerful countries do, what is the alternative?
Humility?
It's not a contradiction, since you don't specify what the enough refers to.
Before 9/11, the govt didn't do enough to ... monitor radical Islamic groups; coordinate intelligence; improve cockpit security; etc.
After 9/11 the govt did too much... to attack any group of Muslims (except of course Saudis); harass innocent travellers with ineffectual identity checks and rules; remove emabrrassing information from public view; etc.
WAAS uses Geostationary Satellites to enhance (augment) GPS accuracy & precision in the USA.
WAAS uses geostationary satellites to relay data, but the important part is the network of 25 ground reference sites. This sites are precisely surveyed, and used to calculate correction data for the GPS signals. This correction data is periodically uplinked to the geostationary satellites, which relay the corrections to WAAS-equipped GPS receivers. The receivers use the correction data for their location to refine the GPS calculation.
just beause there's a Big Red Switch at your disposal does NOT mean you have the RIGHT to pull it.
"oooh, what's THIS pretty big red button do?"
(a bush cabinet member was asked about our future on this planet. his response was of the form "well, we don't know how many more generations we will have on this planet; I mean, before OUR LORD returns, and ends all life on this planet."
kind of makes shutting down GPS seem like a warm-up event of some kind...
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Fuck, I would hate to be on a plane in bad weather the next time a terrorist attack happens. GPS approach, in low-vis situtations (less than 1000 ft), is considered to be the safest approach available.
You are absolutely correct. Note that I was just trying to keep it simple, and speak from the user perspective (i.e. receiver sees GEOs, not ground stations), to point out the incorrect assertion in the parent post.
Although in fact, MORE people have been killed by terrorists under Bush than were killed by terrorists under Clinton, even once you deduct the number killed on 9/11. That's according to the government's own official figures.
See http://www.xciv.org/~meta/2004/09/30#2004-09-29 for graphic, data source, etc.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
How many attacks have US actions after 9/11 prevented?
Frankly, I'm surprised this is "new."
I'd've expected stratigic, on-demand, regional weakening or disabling to have been built into this system from Day One.
Frankly, I'm surprised they don't already "permanently" lower the precision over areas that are "high probability" targets for GPS-guided missiles, such as certain ports and the entire Washington, D.C. area. For a missile, being 100 meters off course can mean missing the target completely.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
If the US openly state that they have controls to shut down both GPS and Galileo, won't that make the services less interesting for time-critical services (like ambulances and firemen) to use?
I mean, won't designers of systems for that type of services go: "But what if the GPS or Galileo is shut down? Then we need an alternative! Might as well not bother with GPS or Galileo and spend our money/time designing the alternative..."
This would be a waste of a perfectly good system, in my opinion, but an understandable design decision for any designer who needs to be sure her design will work.
There has never been doubt in my mind that for simple military reasons the US have had measures to shutdown the service. But the fact that they're openly advertising it seems to indicate to me that they will not hesitate to actually use those measures whenever they think it might help in the way of "preventing terrorists from using it". Nevermind the arguments by others in this thread for why that's fairly useless to begin with.
> You wish to topple every state to build it up as an American colony
If empire were an American desire Europe would have went through being territories all the way to US states by now. Remember that after WWII we stood astride the world with a war machine unmatched in history, totally unopposed by the shattered remains of the rest of the civilized world, in sole possession of the Ultimate Weapon. What did we do? Taxed ourselves to rebuild not only our wartorn allies, but also our defeated enemies.
> thats what Europe objects to.
That is called projection. As in projecting your faults on others. Yes, most of the European powers would indeed take possession and try to keep anything they won in War. Therefore they assume we have the same motivations. But we aren't European. Sometimes this is a good thing, not so other times. This time though, it is a good one. We have no longterm designs on the Middle East.
Democrat delenda est
The cellphones don't use GPS, but the base stations do. After a period of time (varies between an hour and a few days), you would not be able to make any handoffs. Other cell technologies do also use GPS. Alltel, Verizon, Sprint and others would be affected for sure.
If empire were an American desire Europe would have went through being territories all the way to US states by now.
State-based imperialism has been shown ineffective. It's unwieldy, it doesn't really offer any advantages, and it's risky; when you attempt to retain dominance in an area through military means, sometimes people fight back through military means, and it's not always possible to paint the people fighting back against an invading/occupying force as the aggressors. Plus, you can only maintain state-based imperialism if you continuously control the state that runs the empire, and in a democracy like America this runs the risk of temporary local power transfers leading to your empire being disassembled.
The important thing now is economy-based imperialism. There's no need to rule the world when you can just own it. The wave that's been building since 1950, and the wave of the future, is for empire to be economic in nature, for military force to be used only when necessary to support that economic empire, and for the states-- which are increasingly irrelevant anyway-- to be ignored except when they stand in the way of that empire's interests.
Of course, occasionally America may resort to traditional, invade-and-occupy methods of imperialism to maintain its economic empire and ensure its spheres of interest. But this is usually not necessary, and only under certain circumstances is it the appropriate tool to use. Who on earth would try to invade or occupy Europe, anyway? Twice now in the last 250 years Europe has faced a rogue superpower trying to conquer the continent through military means, and both times it repelled and squashed that superpower against staggering odds. Only a very poor businessman would accept those odds even if there were a good reason.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
Nope, we know who has it right and reelected him. The War against Islamic Fundamentalism is the number one priority for our generation and Bush understands that. You and Kerry don't believe that, and were rejected for it. History will prove one our views correct, the question is whether those histories will be written in English or Arabic.
Additionally, you are soon going to be in an economic war with nearly the entire world. History will prove what it always has, the large empires collapse when they get too greedy. Personally, I am working towards that collapse by not buy American products (as much as possible).
Seeing as how your political philosophy has been on the wrong side of the major conflicts the US has been involved in lately (WWII, Vietnam, the Cold War/WWIII) the safe money would be on you being wrong yet again on WWIV on that basis alone.
Umm. WWIII??? Whahahaha. Boy, not only do you parrot back the propaganda from your government perfectly, but you even proove the stereotype that americans are self-centered. There is no WWIII. The US beating up some helpless arabic countries does not constitute a world war.
However, there just might be a WWIII in the near future, with everyone on one side, and the US on the other. You figure out who is the 'wrong' side.
Tonight at 11, Bush; on the heal of passing legislation that is threatening to turnoff GPS, he plans to also disable dead reckoning by.... Stopping time, anyone with a working watch will be considered an enemy combatant..... More at 11.....
Julius Caesar - Act I, Scene i: "What mean'st thou by that? Mend me, thou saucy fellow!"
Remember that after WWII we stood astride the world with a war machine unmatched in history, totally unopposed by the shattered remains of the rest of the civilized world, in sole possession of the Ultimate Weapon. What did we do? Taxed ourselves to rebuild not only our wartorn allies, but also our defeated enemies.
Yep, and the world noticed that and by everything I can tell greatly appreciated it. That generation of Americans has a lot to be proud of. However, it wasn't long before we started to burn through that good will. Maybe it's just me, but the burn rate seems to have gone up a lot in the last two years. However, American pride has not diminished in relation with the actions taken. I've always believed that pride is justified by actions, not vice-versa.
The America of today is not the America of 1945. Using WWII as an example of our good intent only throws current events into sharper relief.
We have no longterm designs on the Middle East.
A telling moment for me was in the debates, when Kerry said it was important to demonstrate that we had no long-term designs on the Middle East. Bush made no comment. Probably because if he had, the obvious rebuttle would have mentioned the huge permament military bases we're building in Iraq.
By the way, there is a narrow difference between outright imperialism and the pseudo-imperialism where you place a "soverign" but for all intents and purposes puppet government in power and tie the economy of the country to your own corporations while maintaining a massive military presence. The only people who are fooled by this difference are the ones doing it.
In other words, if it is true that we (meaning the government) have no long term designs on the Middle East, we are a long way from proving it.
The enemies of Democracy are
not only this, but don't a lot of cell phones use GPS to send location data in the event of a 911 call? my verizon phone has some little splash screen that says aGPS when it starts up, and a friend of mine has a nextel phone with GPS on it. so, in the event of a terrorist attack, lots of people are getting hurt and killed, and in the age of cellphones, the rescue squads can't find them.
great!
Or, more simply put:
"They hate us for our Freedom."
"Only a Terrorist has use for Civil Liberties"
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
In the movie Die hard, the thieves wanted the power to the building to be shut off... so they pretended to be terrorists, knowing what the FBI's protocols would be.
So now, when the terrorists of the world want to create chaos, and want to make sure that emergency vehicles which rely on GPS for positioning and commuunications cannot respond, they do something to have Homeland Security shut down GPS.
Great work guys!