The US Is Testing a Microwave Weapon To Stop North Korea's Missiles (vox.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The US Is Testing a Microwave Weapon To Stop North Korea's Missiles (vox.com)

Posted by BeauHD on Thursday December 7, 2017 @03:30PM from the cruise-control dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Vox: According to an NBC News report, the weapon -- which is still under development -- could be put on a cruise missile and shot at an enemy country from a B-52 bomber. It's designed to use microwaves to target enemy military facilities and destroy electronic systems, like computers, that control their missiles. The weapon itself wouldn't damage the buildings or cause casualties. Air Force developers have been working with Boeing on the system since 2009. They're hoping to receive up to $200 million for more prototyping and testing in the latest defense bill. There's just one problem. It's not clear that the weapon is entirely ready for use -- and it's not clear that it would be any more effective than the powerful weapons the U.S. already possesses. The weapon, which has the gloriously military-style name of Counter-electronics High Power Microwave Advanced Missile Project, or CHAMP, isn't quite ready for action, but it could be soon. Two unnamed Air Force officials told NBC that the weapon could be ready for use in just a few days.

139 of 217 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by DontBeAMoran · 2017-12-07 15:33 · Score: 3, Funny

Because that's how you get popcorn.

--
#DeleteFacebook
1. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by currently_awake · 2017-12-07 16:04 · Score: 2
  
  Designing the system to cook people would be more effective, as the weapons would be shielded.
2. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by PPH · 2017-12-07 16:28 · Score: 1
  
  popcorn
  I believe that was the laser based weapon.
  
  --
  Have gnu, will travel.
3. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by Babel-17 · 2017-12-07 17:05 · Score: 1
  
  Cue the ending to Real Genius ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
4. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by ShanghaiBill · 2017-12-07 17:24 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Designing the system to cook people would be more effective, as the weapons would be shielded.
  This system would require a lot of lead time to load the B-52, takeoff, fly to NK airspace, launch the cruise missile, and wait for its subsonic engines to propel it to the target.
  The NK missile launch last week occurred with NO warning. They were able to fuel and prepare the missile for launch without detection.
  This microwave system would be worthless at countering a NK missile launch. It would only be useful as a first strike weapon. Fear of an American preemptive strike is exactly what motivated NK to develop their nukes in the first place.
  Maybe someday America will learn that you don't convince your adversary to stop being paranoid by threatening to attack them.
5. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by aliquis · 2017-12-07 17:34 · Score: 1
  
  The US has "cook people"-missiles too.
6. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by BronsCon · 2017-12-07 17:37 · Score: 1, Troll
  
  Maybe someday America will learn that you don't convince your adversary to stop being paranoid by threatening to attack them.
  We already know. We are not the orange buffoon who doesn't know.
  
  --
  APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
7. Re: Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by ShanghaiBill · 2017-12-07 17:44 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Don't mistake no public warning with no warning. You are acting like there isn't a new mover of spy satellites watching North Korea at any given moment.
  The spy satellites that have the resolution to see the launch preparations are in LEO, and have a viewing window of less than a minute during each orbit.
  The spy satellites that can dwell and "zoom-in" are only in the movies.
  Also, the missile was prepped and launched in the middle of the night, and this time of year Korea has plenty of clouds.
8. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by mnemotronic · 2017-12-07 18:12 · Score: 1
  
  Designing the system to cook people would be more effective ...
  Or almost cook. It worked for the Cubans. At least that's what I'm guessing they used.
  
  --
  The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
9. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by sysrammer · 2017-12-07 19:59 · Score: 1
  
  "The NK missile launch last week occurred with NO warning. "
  Incorrect. I read in one of the Korean news sites about it a day or two before the launch. The stuff that leaks out of the military probably has a day or two delay. I would expect the mil to have at least a 2 day warning on something like this. (I looked up the Korean site because I saw an article in one of the US mainstream sites.)
  Remember, intelligence such as "order Lobster and lot's of munchies for launch site 11" would be correlated at the NSA, along with all the other clues. Or the KSA, or whatever the Koreans call it.
  
  --
  His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
10. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by sysrammer · 2017-12-07 19:59 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Well, just to play devil's advocate, what has worked?
  
  --
  His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
11. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by Hal_Porter · 2017-12-07 20:10 · Score: 2
  
  This system would require a lot of lead time to load the B-52, takeoff, fly to NK airspace, launch the cruise missile, and wait for its subsonic engines to propel it to the target.
  The NK missile launch last week occurred with NO warning. They were able to fuel and prepare the missile for launch without detection.
  This is why the US needs Prompt Global Strike
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
  
  --
  echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
12. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by Hallux-F-Sinister · 2017-12-07 20:26 · Score: 1
  
  Designing the system to cook people would be more effective, as the weapons would be shielded.
  This system would require a lot of lead time to load the B-52, takeoff, fly to NK airspace, launch the cruise missile, and wait for its subsonic engines to propel it to the target.
  The NK missile launch last week occurred with NO warning. They were able to fuel and prepare the missile for launch without detection.
  This microwave system would be worthless at countering a NK missile launch. It would only be useful as a first strike weapon. Fear of an American preemptive strike is exactly what motivated NK to develop their nukes in the first place.
  Maybe someday America will learn that you don't convince your adversary to stop being paranoid by threatening to attack them.
  Also, microwave energy is powerfully attenuated by moisture in the atmosphere, meaning that in order for a significant amount of microwave energy to reach a distant target, you'd need a LOT of power, or to be pretty close to the target. (The magic of microwave communications lies in the ability to amplify the hell out of the signal on receipt because it gets very small as the distance from the transmitter grows.)
  A different part of the spectrum might be more effective. Unless they're shooting Hot-Pocket missiles. Then the results could be DELICIOUS, just be careful to allow the North Korean nuclear-tipped missile to cool, or else you might burn the roof of your mouth and/or your tongue.
  
  --
  Our reign has gone on long enough. Indeed. Summon the meteors.
13. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by someone1234 · 2017-12-07 20:30 · Score: 1
  
  Not just first strike. It would prevent any further command center functions before carpet bombing them back to the stone age. Though, I don't really think it should spare personnel or buildings in that case. Maybe that is only there to appease the pacifists.
  
  --
  Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
14. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-12-07 21:13 · Score: 1
  
  Well, covert assassination by poisoning worked in Venezuela.
  There's other guy now at the helm but he is just evil, not crazy evil as the one before.
15. Re: Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by michelcolman · 2017-12-07 21:23 · Score: 1
  
  Also, couldn't they just hang up a canopy with leaves above the launch site? Or even a giant picture of the empty launch site?
16. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by Freischutz · 2017-12-07 21:24 · Score: 2
  
  This microwave system would be worthless at countering a NK missile launch. It would only be useful as a first strike weapon. Fear of an American preemptive strike is exactly what motivated NK to develop their nukes in the first place.
  All this is assuming the news report itself is not complete boloney that is simply designed to cause a reaction so the recon analysts can see which ones of the 258 suspected high tech and nuclear weapons sites in N-Korea show a sudden flurry of activity erecting screen defences against a first strike with a microwave weapon.
17. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by michelcolman · 2017-12-07 21:24 · Score: 1
  
  Against their own diplomats?
18. Re: Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by whodunit · 2017-12-07 21:59 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  If only we had stealth drones equipped with synthetic aperture radar that can generate FLIR-quality images through cloud cover. Like the RQ-170 and its successor, the RQ-180...
19. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by BlueStrat · 2017-12-07 22:16 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  This system would require a lot of lead time to load the B-52, takeoff, fly to NK airspace, launch the cruise missile, and wait for its subsonic engines to propel it to the target.
  The NK missile launch last week occurred with NO warning. They were able to fuel and prepare the missile for launch without detection.
  The US could keep a flight/flights of CHAMP-equipped-cruise missile-carrying B52s on station 24/7/365 as the old Soviet Union and NATO used to so during the Cold War.
  Really though, as someone with extensive high-powered RF engineering experience including radar and microwave, I have serious doubts about how effective such a weapon could be IRL. The inverse-square law of transmitted power, distance to receiver/tarfet, and signal strength/current/voltage/thermal heating induced means it would also require enormous amounts of power, especially with a size-limited transmission antenna array due to it all being crammed into a cruise missile.
  It's extremely inefficient energy-transfer wise. Only a tiny fraction of the power transmitted actually reaches the intended target (or receiver in the case of radio). Unless they can pack 1.21 gigawatts (or some similar ridiculously-huge number) into a cruise missile, I can't see how this could possibly be effective and practical as a weapon.
  Sounds more like propaganda for both domestic (look! we're doing...something!) and NK consumption (we'll blind you with Science! [insert cheesy Thomas Doolby '80s pop tune]) while doubling as a handy excuse to hand out US defense money for the usual reasons.
  Strat
  
  --
  Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
20. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by Solandri · 2017-12-07 22:44 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Fear of an American preemptive strike is exactly what motivated NK to develop their nukes in the first place.
  
  Maybe someday America will learn that you don't convince your adversary to stop being paranoid by threatening to attack them.
  You grossly misunderstand North Korea. The U.S. has had the capability to launch a preemptive strike against North Korea unchallenged for over 65 years and hasn't done so. There isn't much else it can/could have done to assuage North Korea's fears and convince it that it wasn't going to attack (at least not without opening up South Korea to another North Korean attack - North Korea's two top goals are to drive the U.S. out of the peninsula, and to reunify it, by violent means if necessary).
  
  Even the U.S. troops stationed in South Korea (about 37,000) aren't sufficient in number to represent any meaningful offensive fighting force if the U.S. did decide to launch a preemptive strike(North Korea has just shy of 1 million active military personnel). The U.S. troops there know it too. They call themselves "speed bumps." Their sole purpose is, in the event of a North Korean invasion, to be overrun and killed, so that the U.S. has an excuse to immediately get involved in a second Korean War without having to go through the UN like the first time (which only succeeded because the USSR was boycotting the UN that week)..
  
  North Korea's ire against the U.S. isn't based on paranoia. It's based on propaganda. Any repressive system generates extreme discontent within its population, which eventually leads to uprising and revolution. Unless you can present the people with an external bogeyman that they can fear and hate instead of their oppressive overload. North Korea has chosen the U.S. to be that bogeyman. They teach their grade schoolers to want to attack Americans for crying out loud. Please, educate yourself on what actually goes on in North Korea before you believe their claims of victimhood.
  
  In a way, North Korea is a test for what the world's future will be like. You attribute the lack of a violent confrontation with North Korea for 65 years to the effectiveness of a pacifist approach to them. My hunch is that it's more because North Korea simply didn't have the capability to strike outside of its borders effectively. The nukes aren't going to end with North Korea. On the contrary, this is just the beginning. First it'll be rogue nation-states getting nukes. Then rogue organizations. Then rogue individuals. You're not going to be able to appease them all by being pacifist. At some point, one of them is going to be sufficiently offended or self-deluded to actually use those nukes.
  
  The world needs to come up with some effective strategy for dealing with the proliferation of nukes. I honestly don't know what the best approach is (if it were simple, we would've already done it). I'm extremely troubled by Trump's aggressive attitude towards North Korea, but I can kinda see his point. We've known for decades that North Korea was a cancer in the socio-political fabric of the world. If it had been excised early on, we wouldn't be having this problem today. But instead we did nothing, taking the pacifist approach and hoping the problem would go away by itself. Well, it hasn't, and now it has nukes. And like I said, this isn't just about North Korea. This is just the beginning. Next it'll be rogue organizations with nukes, then rogue individuals with nukes. I really hope we can establish some effective way to deal with them, or we're doomed. We're going to look back at the time when terrorists brought down airliners with a bomb as the good old days.
21. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by gtall · 2017-12-07 23:04 · Score: 3
  
  There is no convincing the Norks the U.S. doesn't desire to own a poor country with nothing going for it. The intellectual giants running N. Korea only keep the threat of U.S. intervention alive so they can give the public a reason why they should stay in power and shouldn't be first up against the wall when the revolution comes.
22. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by Wrath0fb0b · 2017-12-08 00:42 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe someday America will learn that you don't convince your adversary to stop being paranoid by threatening to attack them.
  Well, every attempt to negotiate or appease North Korea has also lead to paranoia and weapons development.
  Maybe someday we'll all learn that not every situation is like a school exam or a video game where there is a right answer that resolves things cleanly.
23. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by ceoyoyo · 2017-12-08 01:03 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Diplomacy, open trade, and international organizations. It's not as sexy as nukes and special forces, but the current stability of the world (and it is in an unprecedented state of stability) is almost certainly due to those things.
24. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by jittles · 2017-12-08 01:16 · Score: 1
  
  The NK missile launch last week occurred with NO warning. They were able to fuel and prepare the missile for launch without detection.
  That is incorrect. I read a news report out of Tokyo that NK appeared to be preparing for a ballistic missile test about 6 hours before the launch occurred. (Quick Googling find one such source here)
  That's not to say that a surprise launch cannot occur, just that we have so far managed to detect them in advance.
25. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by duke_cheetah2003 · 2017-12-08 01:25 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe someday America will learn that you don't convince your adversary to stop being paranoid by threatening to attack them.
  You are aware we have tried to negotiate with them, right? We gave them aid, asking them to stop developing nukes. They agreed, then immediately went about developing nukes in secret until inspectors were told to take a hike. More than once we've gone down the 'let's play nice' game only to have the North Koreans breaking the agreements.
  Negotiation kinda requires that both sides be faithful to the agreements. North Korea has repeatedly shown it will not adhere to any agreements and will break them whenever it feels like it can.
  I'm not saying aggression and the standoff we have now is productive or useful, however, negotiation is no more useful or productive. In fact the latter seems to just make everyone look like fools when NK breaks agreements. At least the major presence of our military in the area makes North Korea think twice about foolishness. I'm pretty certain if we were not there on the border, NK would have invaded SK a long time ago. That is their stated goal: Reunification under the communist rule. And destroy the USA.
26. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by dcw3 · 2017-12-08 01:41 · Score: 1
  
  "The NK missile launch last week occurred with NO warning. "
  No public warning. There's zero chance that we didn't know about the planned launch.
  
  --
  Just another day in Paradise
27. Re: Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by dcw3 · 2017-12-08 01:43 · Score: 1
  
  Clouds can be seen through with a variety of satellite sensors
  
  --
  Just another day in Paradise
28. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by dcw3 · 2017-12-08 01:45 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  Yeah sure. Please point to any time since the Korean war where that's worked with North Korea. Oops, you can't.
  
  --
  Just another day in Paradise
29. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by Spamalope · 2017-12-08 02:05 · Score: 1
  
  The actual launch may be from South Korea, but it'd be destabilizing to advertise that.
  
  Here's hoping the weapon isn't another Bradly that only works on paper.
30. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by kilfarsnar · 2017-12-08 02:05 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Diplomacy, open trade, and international organizations. It's not as sexy as nukes and special forces, but the current stability of the world (and it is in an unprecedented state of stability) is almost certainly due to those things.
  What do diplomacy, open trade, and international organizations have to do with North Korea?
  Only everything. There are no good military solutions to the conflict with North Korea. They all involve hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths. If you think that's acceptable, we should probably reconsider who the murderous psychopath is in this situation.
  
  --
  "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
31. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by DarthVain · 2017-12-08 02:07 · Score: 1
  
  No, that is just the NK early warning system.
  Sir, apparently they had advance warning our missiles were inbound.
  How is this possible?
  They have corn.
  Dear God!
32. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by Spamalope · 2017-12-08 02:08 · Score: 1
  
  And in Iran. I suppose they may be talking because they've learned the project's cover is blown, though that's no reason they couldn't try for a little intel with your idea anyway even if the project is real (well - and actually works...).
33. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by DarthVain · 2017-12-08 02:10 · Score: 1
  
  I think the idea would be to have them on a ship, that is sitting next to NK.
34. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by kilfarsnar · 2017-12-08 02:17 · Score: 2
  
  Yeah sure. Please point to any time since the Korean war where that's worked with North Korea. Oops, you can't.
  How about the whole time? The armistice agreement has held, and no one has attacked anyone. What's your definition of "worked"?
  
  --
  "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
35. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by freak0fnature · 2017-12-08 02:29 · Score: 1
  
  Val Kilmer is a Real Genius when it comes to microwave weapons and popcorn.
36. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by Godwin+O'Hitler · 2017-12-08 02:40 · Score: 1
  
  Agree. A country's military potential is not measured by headcount.
  
  --
  No, your children are not the special ones. Nor are your pets.
37. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by kilfarsnar · 2017-12-08 02:41 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  North Korea's ire against the U.S. isn't based on paranoia. It's based on propaganda. Any repressive system generates extreme discontent within its population, which eventually leads to uprising and revolution. Unless you can present the people with an external bogeyman that they can fear and hate instead of their oppressive overload. North Korea has chosen the U.S. to be that bogeyman. They teach their grade schoolers to want to attack Americans for crying out loud. Please, educate yourself on what actually goes on in North Korea before you believe their claims of victimhood.
  The ironic thing to me is that this describes the United States as well. Just reverse the names, and the paragraph still works. We don't demonize North Korea in our text books, but the rest is pretty accurate.
  
  We've known for decades that North Korea was a cancer in the socio-political fabric of the world. If it had been excised early on, we wouldn't be having this problem today. But instead we did nothing, taking the pacifist approach and hoping the problem would go away by itself. Well, it hasn't, and now it has nukes.
  You think McArthur should have been allowed to go all the way to the Chinese border? You think the US would have prevailed in a war with China? I think you need to read up on the history if you think the US has taken a pacifist approach to North Korea. We killed 600,000 civilians there. "Hoping the problem would go away by itself" does not at all describe the US actions since. We have been active on the peninsula since the armistice, and would probably be in a better position if we had honored our own commitments after the 1994 framework was established.
  
  --
  "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
38. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by kilfarsnar · 2017-12-08 02:43 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe someday America will learn that you don't convince your adversary to stop being paranoid by threatening to attack them.
  Well, every attempt to negotiate or appease North Korea has also lead to paranoia and weapons development.
  You sure about that? http://www.independent.co.uk/v...
  
  --
  "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
39. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by Wulf2k · 2017-12-08 03:08 · Score: 1
  
  and no one has attacked anyone. What's your definition of "worked"?
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
40. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by Wrath0fb0b · 2017-12-08 03:30 · Score: 2
  
  Clinton got played (and I say this as someone that's voted 'Clinton' 5 times already), and so did South Korea. North Korea never dismantled their nuclear program, as was obvious from being ready for tests. They never stopped counterfeiting US dollars or using their 'credentialed' diplomats to run drugs and ivory.
  Their MO is pretty clear: do bad things, expect to be rewarded for stopping them, then do them again in order to extract more concessions. Most of the world is wise to this game after this many iterations . . .
  It's a no-win situation.
41. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by LifesABeach · 2017-12-08 03:49 · Score: 1
  
  Popcorn? I was thinking Top Ramen noodles.
42. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by LifesABeach · 2017-12-08 03:51 · Score: 1
  
  Laser based Popcorn? As a weapon for the masses?
43. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by Cederic · 2017-12-08 03:58 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, comparing training, equipment, the benefits of holding a defensive position, the logistics involved in materially outnumbering the US at any given location and the speed with which reinforcements will arrive I was sat here thinking, "That's almost a fair fight."
44. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by dwillden · 2017-12-08 04:30 · Score: 1
  
  Except that they haven't worked, The ceasefire was signed in 1953, it's now 2017 and things haven't changed much. Every couple years NK starts rattling their sabers again. Even more so every time we get a new President. Back in 94 when I was in Basic they were pushing hard realizing that Clinton was more of a pushover than Reagan or Bush I had been.
  
  --
  I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
45. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by Archangel+Michael · 2017-12-08 04:58 · Score: 2
  
  hey all involve hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths. If you think that's acceptable, we should probably reconsider who the murderous psychopath is in this situation.
  If a brief war, killing a 100,000 civilians saves LA or SF or Seattle from becoming Chernobyl you'd call me a psychopath? Really
  That is one of the potential options being bandied about. And it isn't like we want to kill 100,000 people in NK, it is that we'd rather not have a city that used to have millions as a pile of nuclear rubble. The difference totalitarian dictators and free people is that brutal dictators don't care about anyone but themselves. And both you and I care about more than ourselves (even if we disagree on approach). THAT is what is the difference maker here.
  Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands in NK have already died under the Kims rule. And more are likely, regardless of the war. I don't see you trying to save them.
  
  --
  Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
46. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by BronsCon · 2017-12-08 05:11 · Score: 1
  
  Ah yes, he's merely threatening to take out the dictator, not actually doing it. I'll remind you that's how the Bushes started, as well, and they did eventually start wars.
  
  Why not an offer along the lines of "lose the guns at your southern border and we'll lift some sanctions; drop your nuke program and we'll lift the rest; let us build military installations within your borders and we'll protect you with our nukes" instead? You know, turn our nukes into a positive for them, rather than a negative, and entice them to become an ally, not just to us but to their neighbors who currently fear them, instead of threatening to wipe them off the map.
  
  If that doesn't work (and similar talks were preventing escalation until Trump came along), then we threaten to wipe them off the map. But the talks were working, progress was being made, and The Cheeto King decided to throw all of that away and start taunting world leaders.
  
  And this isn't even a Trump vs. Obama thing, either; the "same-old, same-old" you refer to came from GWB and his father. Even GWB was in talks with North Korea, though.
  
  --
  APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
47. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by x0 · 2017-12-08 05:21 · Score: 1
  
  How about the whole time? The armistice agreement has held, and no one has attacked anyone. What's your definition of "worked"?
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_border_incidents_involving_North_and_South_Korea
  
  I don't think we have the same definition of 'no attacks.
  
  --
  In the immortal words of Socrates, who said; 'I drank what?'
48. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by dcw3 · 2017-12-08 06:09 · Score: 1
  
  I wish I had mod points for you. As someone who spent six years working over there, I'm in full agreement with what you've stated here. I will add that I feel for the people of NK because they quite simply don't know anything about the outside world unless they're part of the ruling class.
  
  --
  Just another day in Paradise
49. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by dcw3 · 2017-12-08 06:11 · Score: 1
  
  The US has "cook people"-missiles too.
  Soylent Sidewinder?
  Human Harpoon?
  
  --
  Just another day in Paradise
50. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by Archangel+Michael · 2017-12-08 06:49 · Score: 1
  
  Well, you do have a point. The problem is, the wars in the Middle East go way way way back to just about the beginning of time. David and Goliath are still fighting to this day.
  
  --
  Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
51. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by BlueStrat · 2017-12-08 07:11 · Score: 1
  
  MASERs bro. Thy arenâ(TM)t just going to shoot RF Willy-nilly. Or if they are, sweet jebus thatâ(TM)s dumb.
  Yes, I'm aware/familiar of/with MASERs, Traveling-Wave-Tube (TWT), magnetron, yada yada.
  Physics, bro.
  First, you have energy conversion losses inherent in whatever/whichever device you're generating/amplifying the microwaves with. That microwave energy must then be directed/radiated which means more losses even in a system with no size/mass/shape restraints. Then Mr. Inverse Square Law comes out to play saying the signal intensity will drop by the inverse square of distance. Now, how will you put that much energy into a package light and small enough for a Tomahawk to carry in addition to the weapon system itself?
  Think of it as trying to accurately and extremely rapidly microwave a hotpocket to a smoking crisp while it is sitting on a table in the basement of a building, doing it from a cruise missile traveling ~500-600kph at a few hundred meters altitude or more.
  The power required alone is just nuts, never mind any of the other basic physics obstacles.
  Strat
  
  --
  Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
52. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by Whorhay · 2017-12-08 07:53 · Score: 1
  
  I don't know that casualties on the NK side really figure in to it for the USA. The problem with getting involved in any kind of shooting war with NK is that the SK capital city is within easy artillery range of NK. And NK has for decades now had enough firepower aimed at Seoul to reduce much of it to rubble within minutes of the start of hostilities. That's a city and metropolitan area with a population of around 35 million people. There is basically no known military option available that won't likely end up with millions of people, who are our allies, ending up dead. If NK starts a shooting war then we'll likely have to go all in, but it'd be extremely foolish for us to try and knock out Kim as a preemptive solution to the possibility that he could launch on a few of our cities.
53. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by thatDBA · 2017-12-08 08:47 · Score: 1
  
  C.A.P - Combat Air Patrol - aircraft that are armed constantly rotated to Patrol a conflict zone. I'm sure we could do a C.A.P. w. fighter escorts protecting B-52s equipped with a cruise missile.
54. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by david_thornley · 2017-12-08 09:20 · Score: 1
  
  How likely is it that Kim would start a war knowing that he'd be obliterated? There's a difference between being a psychopath and a suicide bomber.
  Moreover, North Korea is really China's problem, and China would much rather not have a nuclear war adjacent to its border. The Chinese government knows perfectly well what happens if North Korea launches a nuke.
  The right thing to do is not to stir up trouble.
  And, as far as those hundreds of thousands of North Koreans, the number of civilian deaths in the Seoul area on the first day of the war could easily exceed that. Some problems have no good solution.
  
  --
  "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
55. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by david_thornley · 2017-12-08 09:22 · Score: 1
  
  How about no significant attacks? I don't really care about border incidents. I care about war. As long as Seoul is intact, the status quo is working.
  
  --
  "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
56. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by david_thornley · 2017-12-08 09:24 · Score: 1
  
  Um, when did Seoul get leveled by North Korean artillery? If the answer is "it hasn't been", then the ceasefire has worked for sixty-four years. We can live with saber-rattling.
  
  --
  "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
57. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by david_thornley · 2017-12-08 09:29 · Score: 1
  
  The South Korean army is about half a million strong, and I'd expect them to be much more competent than the North Korean army. Add a small but significant contingent of the US Army, and I'd expect the north to lose.
  
  --
  "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
58. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by david_thornley · 2017-12-08 09:32 · Score: 1
  
  We did that in the Cold War. It's expensive and hard on the aircraft, but we could do it again.
  
  --
  "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
59. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by wyHunter · 2017-12-08 09:39 · Score: 1
  
  Unfortunately in any Korean war the likely city that was be hit with nuclear weapons first is..Seoul.
60. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by wyHunter · 2017-12-08 09:41 · Score: 1
  
  I doubt whether Clinton got played - politicians of any stripe don't want solutions, they just don't want things to fall apart on their watch. You can say the same for Obama, Bush, Bush, Reagan, Carter , etc.
61. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by Shogun37 · 2017-12-09 11:53 · Score: 1
  
  Open trade and diplomacy only work when both sides act in good faith. When the only thing NK wants to negotiate is how much they'll get paid to go away this time....Well, it's obvious who the psycho is. The time frame for a good solution is long past. Being firm with NK, in the beginning, would have slowed this down. Previous presidents payed NK off, because they had other things they wanted to deal with. Paying them off was just easier. So that is what NK learned. Make a fuss, and Europe will wet its panties and beg the US to pay off the crazy man with the bad haircut. Wait, they're both doing it again...
62. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by cold+fjord · 2017-12-09 16:43 · Score: 2
  
  How likely is it that Kim would start a war knowing that he'd be obliterated? There's a difference between being a psychopath and a suicide bomber.
  
  Parallel between Japan 1941 and N. Korea 2017?
  The Japanese, many Arab states, and North Korea have had various times held to forms of honor cultures that sometime lead to bad outcomes.
  
  Moreover, North Korea is really China's problem, and China would much rather not have a nuclear war adjacent to its border. The Chinese government knows perfectly well what happens if North Korea launches a nuke
  The sovereign nation of North Korea has repeatedly stated it is at war with the United States, that the armistice is off, and stated its intent to attack the United States with nuclear weapons. It has both nuclear weapons and it seems the long range ICBMs to deliver them, if not now, then soon. That might suggest the United States has at least some "minor" direct interest.
  
  The right thing to do is not to stir up trouble.
  
  Trouble already exists, and the war never ended. Waiting for much longer will result in it moving to another level.
  
  And, as far as those hundreds of thousands of North Koreans, the number of civilian deaths in the Seoul area on the first day of the war could easily exceed that. Some problems have no good solution.
  The situation of Seoul is difficult to calculate fully given the many variable, but it is probably better than commonly held. One thing is clear, however: some solutions are better than others. Waiting too long will probably make things worse, probably much worse.
  North Korea is already deeply involved in many criminal enterprises, including drugs, counterfeiting currency (especially US), and the arms trade, to name a few. How do you think it would work out if they perfect their nuclear weapons and then begin selling them? There are nations that would be happy to buy nuclear weapons if they were for sale, and there are terrorist groups with access to deep pockets.
  
  --
  much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
63. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by kilfarsnar · 2017-12-11 02:41 · Score: 1
  
  If a brief war, killing a 100,000 civilians saves LA or SF or Seattle from becoming Chernobyl you'd call me a psychopath? Really
  Yes, really. You have no way of knowing that any war would be brief. And you have no way of knowing for sure that killing 100,000 civilians in one place would save more in another. You don't have a crystal ball and cannot see the future. So what you would be advocating is killing 100,000 people for the possibility that more would live afterwards who otherwise would not. The Trolley Problem is an interesting thought experiment, but nothing more. Any time people start thinking that the ends justify the means, terrible things happen.
  
  Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands in NK have already died under the Kims rule. And more are likely, regardless of the war. I don't see you trying to save them.
  No, you don't see me trying to save them. What happens to people on the other side of the world is not my responsibility. But if you think the US position on NK has anything to do with saving North Korean lives, you better ask the people of Iraq how that works out. I know our foreign adventures are often sold as humanitarian endeavors, because we just feel so bad for those poor oppressed people. But US foreign policy is about advancing US interests. The feel-good bullshit is there to get the citizenry on board with the program.
  
  --
  "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
64. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by kilfarsnar · 2017-12-11 02:44 · Score: 1
  
  Open trade and diplomacy only work when both sides act in good faith. When the only thing NK wants to negotiate is how much they'll get paid to go away this time....Well, it's obvious who the psycho is. The time frame for a good solution is long past. Being firm with NK, in the beginning, would have slowed this down. Previous presidents payed NK off, because they had other things they wanted to deal with. Paying them off was just easier. So that is what NK learned. Make a fuss, and Europe will wet its panties and beg the US to pay off the crazy man with the bad haircut. Wait, they're both doing it again...
  There is blame to go around. http://www.independent.co.uk/v...
  
  --
  "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
65. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by david_thornley · 2017-12-11 05:01 · Score: 1
  
  The Japanese government in 1941 did not intend to sign a suicide pact. They had a strategy, which they screwed up on December 7, 1941. Kim knows what would happen if he attacks out, and he's a psychopath, not suicidal or honor-driven. North Korea is still at war legally, but not practically. The peace holds.
  For purposes of terrorism, there isn't that tremendous amount of difference between Pakistan having nukes (which they so) or North Korea. Muslim terrorism isn't the only threat here, but it's the biggest one.
  
  --
  "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
66. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by CommanderRyalis · 2017-12-12 04:53 · Score: 1
  
  Oh sure I can just here they're propaganda declaring death to the US occupiers...
67. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by BronsCon · 2017-12-12 05:36 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, I can also just in this place they are propaganda... I suppose you might learn to form a cogent argument some time after you learn to forma coherent sentence.
  
  --
  APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
68. Re:Are North Korea using corn-based missiles? by CommanderRyalis · 2017-12-12 15:00 · Score: 1
  
  I realized my spelling errors after the fact, not my fault Slashdot doesn't let you edit posts.
Thank God for North Korea by aberglas · 2017-12-07 15:49 · Score: 4, Insightful

Finally, a reason to spend billions more on missile defense. The arms industry will be very happy indeed.
1. Re:Thank God for North Korea by currently_awake · 2017-12-07 16:07 · Score: 2
  
  High energy ground based lasers, using adaptive optics to reduce atmospheric distortion, could reliably block North Korean missiles from hitting America. All the technology exists for this.
2. Re:Thank God for North Korea by Hal_Porter · 2017-12-07 16:24 · Score: 1
  
  Prompt global strike! Rods from God! Boost phase intercept! Laser weapons!
  In a situation where North Korea is brandishing a nuclear tipped ICBM and threatening to launch it at the US a bit like a crazy person with a gun doing a suicide by cop, all of those start to seem like they'd be very nice to have.
  
  --
  echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
3. Re:Thank God for North Korea by DerekLyons · 2017-12-07 18:55 · Score: 1
  
  In a situation where North Korea is brandishing a nuclear tipped ICBM and threatening to launch it at the US a bit like a crazy person with a gun doing a suicide by cop, all of those start to seem like they'd be very nice to have.
  Since we're not in such a situation... (Hint: The person making threats and increasing the chance of war lives in Mar-a-Lago, not Pyongyang. If he'd shut the fuck up and stop acting like a schoolyard bully, we wouldn't be in this situation.)
4. Re:Thank God for North Korea by Hal_Porter · 2017-12-07 19:47 · Score: 2
  
  The DPRK has been declaring war, or claiming war has been declared against it 200 times since 1997. It's basically the default thing for the DPRK to do.
  https://www.nknews.org/2017/09...
  
  Despite the very public statement, Ri's comments are far from the first time the DPRK has claimed that declarations of war have been made against it.
  The phrase "declaration of war" appears in Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) English language articles over 200 times since 1997 - a search of NK Pro's KCNA Watch database shows - and many of those entries echo Ri's press conference.
  In fact, Ri's comments aren't even the first time that North Korea has claimed Trump himself has declared war on the country.
  On September 22 and 23, six articles were published by the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) in response to Trump's UN General Assembly (UNGA) speech on September 19, during which he threatened to "totally destroy" North Korea
  "The United States has great strength and patience but if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea," Trump said during his UNGA address.
  The six KCNA articles carried statements from the Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of the Country of the DPRK (CPRC), the Central Committee of the Workers' Party of Korea (CC, WPK), various military officials and citizens, all of whom claimed the speech represented a declaration of war.
  "Trump's rubbish is the open declaration of war against our supreme dignity, state, social system and people, and an unpardonable extra-large provocation," the CPRC statement said, according to KCNA.
  So aside from Trump's recent comments, what constitutes a declaration of war in the eyes of the North Korean state?
  THE COUNTRY THAT CRIED WAR
  In April, KCNA published a memorandum by the DPRK Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) that provided a recap of what, it claimed, were declarations of war against North Korea.
  A review of the memorandum reveals a broad set of criteria. For one, policies from North Korea's opponents have been cited as a declaration of war.
  In 2003, for instance, the MFA considered President George Bush to have openly declared "nuclear war" against North Korea "by putting it as a target of preemptive nuclear strike," according to the memorandum.
  Accusations against the DPRK also qualified. Again in 2003, KCNA said that U.S. claims that North Korea was engaged in "drug smuggling, counterfeiting of money, suppression of religion, human traffic (sic) and training of computer hackers" as well increased pressure on aviation and merchant vessel activity, qualified as a declaration of war "no matter how hard they may try to cover up them."
  The adoption of sanctions against the country have also inspired this response from North Korean state media and in 2006, the year of North Korea's first nuclear test, it claimed that the adoption of UN Security Council (UNSC) resolutions against the country was a "de facto 'declaration of war'."
  "The UNSC 'resolution,' needless to say, cannot be construed otherwise than a declaration of a war against the DPRK," the MFA said, following the adoption of Resolution 1718.
  The same claim has been made repeatedly following the adoption of subsequent UNSC resolutions as well as after the U.S.'s imposition of unilateral sanctions. Further UN action against North Korea has also inspired similar responses.
  In November 2014, a UNGA committee voted overwhelmingly in favor of a draft resolution recommending that North Korea be referred to the International Criminal Court.
  North Korea's National Defence Commission (NDC) responded with the following statement: "The brigandish 'resolution' against the DPRK's genuine human rights means the most undisguised war declaration to infringe upon its sovereignty," the November 23 NDC statement read.
  The joint milit
  
  --
  echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
5. Re:Thank God for North Korea by gtall · 2017-12-07 23:10 · Score: 1
  
  Bullshit. The Norks have a vested interest in pumping up the anxiety level, it allows them to claim their leaders shouldn't be taken out and shot due to incompetence. The fact that the Orange Bobblehead falls into hyperventilation is also beside the point, he hyperventilates about anything. And when something doesn't present itself as something he can fulminate against, he'll create faux "issues". The thing about el Presidente Tweetie is that his brain cells aren't really connected. They require a constant dose of TV to feel alive or they'd strangle themselves to end it all.
6. Re:Thank God for North Korea by drinkypoo · 2017-12-07 23:38 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  High energy ground based lasers, using adaptive optics to reduce atmospheric distortion, could reliably block North Korean missiles from hitting America. All the technology exists for this.
  We already have laser planes which can shoot down a missile under ideal conditions. I'd be surprised if those haven't been improved since they were invented, to the point that they might even shoot down a sufficiently primitive missile in the real world.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
7. Re:Thank God for North Korea by atherophage · 2017-12-07 23:51 · Score: 1
  
  Was it just last week some Russian official nailed it, saying North Korea is reacting to US provocations? The US and other international players have been screwing with North Korea for a long time - pushing all the right buttons to make it appear as though NK is crazy. Think of North Korea as a porcupine: small, almost invisible; poke it and it will stick it to you. https://dissidentvoice.org/201...
8. Re:Thank God for North Korea by lazarus · 2017-12-08 00:36 · Score: 1
  
  I'm very concerned that if we weaponize space and there IS a war the trash we would end up with circling the Earth would trap us here until we achieved our well-deserved extinction. Maybe we should try diplomacy instead.
  
  --
  I am not interested in articles about life extension advancements.
9. Re:Thank God for North Korea by Hal_Porter · 2017-12-08 01:00 · Score: 1
  
  Well you need a mix of both. To parody Einstein's "Science without Religion Is Lame, Religion without Science Is Blind" in a way he'd no doubt have strongly objected to "Diplomacy without the threat of force Is lame, the threat of force without diplomacy is blind".
  It's also debatable whether regimes like North Korea or Iran are actually deterrable in the way the USSR was and China hopefully is. After all Saddam's Iraq was not deterrable - given a threat of regime destruction it failed to leave Kuwait (which would have fractured the coalition stopped the first Gulf War) and also failed to disarm verifiably (which led to the US/UK invasion and Saddam being hanged by his enemies). A rational but evil regime - say the USSR or (hopefully) the PRC - would have realised the US was serious in each case and backed off. As someone observed of Saddam he was very good at reading his inner circle but absolutely hopeless at reading the intentions of the US or the 'international community'. Such an autistic regime - essentially one that followed 'the threat of force without diplomacy' - way well decide to launch nukes even if that means the end of the regime.
  And space is weaponized as soon as you become dependent on spy satellites and GPS. Launching a few Rods From God kinetic bombardment satellites doesn't change that.
  Right now North Korea has a missile which could reach the US, and nuclear warheads. It threatens to start a nuclear war almost on a weekly basis. Previous attempts at diplomacy have completely failed to stop its progress to developing the components for a nuclear tipped ICBM. I'd say that at some point in the future having the means to stop that ICBM being launched or destroying it in the boost phase may well save a US city from destruction. And would save many North Korean cities from being zapped when the US retaliates.
  Now you may say "let's let other people deal with this". And as a Brit, I sympathize. The difference is that the UK could punt stuff to the US after WWII. The US has no other compatible power to do that to.
  And if you're interested in 'Diplomacy without the threat of force', the UK tried that in the run up to WWII. It almost cost the country. And the US doesn't have anyone who can come in and save it, the way the US did for the UK in WWII.
  
  --
  echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
10. Re:Thank God for North Korea by Cederic · 2017-12-08 04:06 · Score: 1
  
  Was it just last week some Russian official nailed it
  No.
  Any other silly questions?
11. Re:Thank God for North Korea by Hal_Porter · 2017-12-08 04:50 · Score: 2
  
  Saddam agreed to complete disarmament and full inspections prior to the invasion, but not until the US and UK were on his doorstep. He even offered exile for himself. However the "coalition of the willing" ignored him and invaded anyway.
  He didn't leave Kuwait before the Gulf War. And he didn't disarm verifiably before the invasion - he maintained a policy of strategic ambiguity for fear of Iran, according to George Piro who interrogated him for the FBI
  https://archives.fbi.gov/archi...
  "Saddam misled the world into believing that he had weapons of mass destruction in the months leading up to the war because he feared another invasion by Iran, but he did fully intend to rebuild his WMD program."
  
  That turned out well. And the DPRK was watching. They know that they can't trust the USA to let them exist unless they are in a position to make them pay dearly for invading. Kim doesn't want to end up like Saddam or Ghadaffi.
  The US won't attack the DPRK because it has enough conventional weapons to cause mass carnage in South Korea. Then again if you're Kim, maybe the fact that people don't want to see Korean killed doesn't even occur to you, because his regime has killed a lot of Koreans - ones in the South when the North invaded and loads in the North due to starvation, concentration camps and so on.
  
  Other countries without much of an effective military seem to manage okay from a diplomatic standpoint.
  Well it depends what you mean. The UK does OK diplomatically, but then it spends 2% of GDP on defence, has nukes and aircraft carriers and has the US as a close ally. UK diplomatic policy independent of the US wouldn't be effective. In fact the only times the UK operated independent of the US - Suez or the Falklands for example - it either lost diplomatically or had to use its military to get anything done. France mirrors the UK, except with no US alliance. Germany spends 1% on defence but has NATO to back it up. In fact most NATO countries don't spend 2% and freeloaded on the US to defend them in the Cold War. Post Cold War they're effective if they can shame the US into action, but ineffective with when they can't.
  
  The DPRK's leadership just wants to exist. They are no real threat (or haven't been until the US pushed them into it).
  Except they threaten war with almost everyone. They've killed their own people. They've attacked South Korea on multiple occasions. Now they've got nuclear ICBMs they could easily put the US in a situation where it attacks them. I.e. nukes haven't brought them security. Of course inside North Korea, you'd be killed for saying that. Which is what makes them an autistic regime. And that in turn makes them dangerous.
  
  It's ridiculous. Just leave them alone and wait for their population to oust the leaders of a failed system. It's cheaper and safer for the planet.
  What should the US do if North Korean fuels up an ICBM, puts a nuke on it and shows every sign of launching it, either at the US or a country the US is treaty bound to protect?
  With prompt global strike you could hit the missile on the ground with a non nuclear weapon. With boost phase intercept you'd have a chance of hitting it in just after launch.
  
  Earlier this week the DPRK offered diplomacy and the UN sent an envoy. The US's response so far has been "Not until you give up your nukes". Wut? You don't start a diplomatic exercise by making demands before you will agree to talks. There is no risk to talking unless you don't want a resolution.
  The DPRK acts out because it gets rewarded for it. Clinton and Bush both did deals with them where they agreed to stop their nuclear and missile programs. South Korea and the US shipped them oil, food, and
  
  --
  echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
12. Re:Thank God for North Korea by ebvwfbw · 2017-12-09 05:27 · Score: 1
  
  Don't worry. There is always an asshole out there to worry about.
Re:Two unnamed air force officials by Xenx · 2017-12-07 15:50 · Score: 2

The NBC article only says two Air Force officials. They don't specifying unnamed, or give names. They just refer to them as two officials. NBC not specifying their names doesn't make them traitors, or fictitious.
Nothing Like War by hcs_$reboot · 2017-12-07 15:56 · Score: 1

to stimulate scientific progress.

--
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
1. Re:Nothing Like War by currently_awake · 2017-12-07 16:09 · Score: 1
  
  Correct. Many of the scientific advances we enjoy came from war. The Nobel Prize came from a man unhappy his invention helped kill.
2. Re:Nothing Like War by coofercat · 2017-12-08 02:10 · Score: 1
  
  ...stimulate corporate progress
  Now we know what's going on - there's a company with some multi-billion dollar tech, there's the US government and a wonky foreign state. One tells the other to do something to the last one. We've been down this road before, and it didn't go terribly well.
Military intelligence by Jesus+H+Rolle · 2017-12-07 16:00 · Score: 1

Counter-electronics High Power Microwave Advanced Missile Project, or CHAMP
Someone needs to explain to the military how acronyms work.
1. Re:Military intelligence by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2017-12-07 17:22 · Score: 1
  
  I still remember when a group out of UW's CSE tried to get away with referring to their project as "FRITTER", even though the first two words were "Radio Frequency".
  
  --
  #DeleteChrome
2. Re:Military intelligence by blindseer · 2017-12-07 17:45 · Score: 1
  
  If you want a sponge bath next then just ask nicely and wait. Maybe he'll be nice enough to sponge you off too when he's finished. His parents may be bed ridden so no need to be rude to the man.
  
  --
  I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
3. Re:Military intelligence by Godwin+O'Hitler · 2017-12-08 02:47 · Score: 1
  
  Lives are second shelf on the left if you ever decide to get one.
  
  --
  No, your children are not the special ones. Nor are your pets.
4. Re:Military intelligence by Godwin+O'Hitler · 2017-12-08 02:51 · Score: 1
  
  They know how acronyms work. That's why they didn't try to make us pronounce CEHPMAMP.
  
  --
  No, your children are not the special ones. Nor are your pets.
Re: Somebody forgot what B in ICBM stands for. by Jesus+H+Rolle · 2017-12-07 16:02 · Score: 1

Surely there are electronics on the warhead that control detonation. Those would be nice to take out.
Re: Better ideas by Jesus+H+Rolle · 2017-12-07 16:04 · Score: 2

However, it is unlikely that the Muslims will develop nuclear weapons
Pakistan's already got nukes, you know.
Re:Somebody forgot what B in ICBM stands for. by arth1 · 2017-12-07 16:05 · Score: 2

It's just a bad story title. This weapon isn't intended to take out missiles, but take out the launch facilities before launch. TFS says as much too.
Re:Two unnamed air force officials by Hal_Porter · 2017-12-07 16:10 · Score: 1

You need to listen to this to get your blood lust up
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

--
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
Re: Somebody forgot what B in ICBM stands for. by guruevi · 2017-12-07 16:30 · Score: 1

Not so sure about that, especially given it's North Korea, it might just be an electric detonation. A mechanical kitchen timer could be sufficient to flip a switch and is impervious to microwaves. Additionally, a missile is a Faraday cage and even if you take out sensitive electronics like GPS, simply reaching a target is sufficient for the regime, even if it's wildly inaccurate.

--
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Re:EMP? by AHuxley · 2017-12-07 16:41 · Score: 2

The US mil has been messing around with this since the Christofilos effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... years.
Look for Project 137. Task Force 88. Operation Argus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... .
Lots of early thinking about how to shield the USA from missiles went on.

--
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
That'll blow their minds! by swell · 2017-12-07 16:58 · Score: 1

"wouldn't damage the buildings or cause casualties."
Unless a cooked brain is considered a casualty. Medium or well-done; how much does it take to disrupt neural pathways? How much does it take to disrupt circuit pathways?

--
...omphaloskepsis often...
Re:Somebody forgot what B in ICBM stands for. by blindseer · 2017-12-07 17:15 · Score: 2

But the ballistic missile is not ballistic until the engines finish propelling the warhead. During that time it needs it's electronics functional or it will not reach the target. That's why the weapon must be deployed within 700 miles of the launch site, to catch it while it's still under power. Beyond that range means the missile has gone ballistic, with a "B", and is no longer vulnerable to this weapon. That is unless the cruise missile doesn't just keep going towards it until they collide, which if the missile had enough fuel to do that kind of makes the whole microwave thing redundant.

--
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
The North Korean people are starving by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2017-12-07 17:18 · Score: 1

So it would probably be just as effective to parachute drop a few hundred standard microwave ovens and several thousand cases of Marie Callender Pot Pies on the country.
While the people are busy eating, a special commando team could easily disable the rockets.

--
#DeleteChrome
1. Re:The North Korean people are starving by drinkypoo · 2017-12-07 23:41 · Score: 2
  
  So it would probably be just as effective to parachute drop a few hundred standard microwave ovens and several thousand cases of Marie Callender Pot Pies on the country.
  Self-heating MREs will work a lot better, unless your plan is to blow out their electrical grid when all their citizens try to run a microwave at the same time.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
B-2 Is Poor Choice In NK by mentil · 2017-12-07 17:22 · Score: 1

North Korea has crazy anti-air defenses. All their missiles would be in the air long before the B-52s made it near the launch facilities. A first strike would involve stealth bombers. Now, if these cruise missiles were launched from the ground near the DMZ after their radar installations were taken out, that might make some sense... except the launch facilities are going to be a top-priority target, above radar installations.
Also, it's a bit of an assumption that their ballistic missiles are aimed electronically rather than by turning mechanical wheels like old artillery. With Trump at least, he'd authorize the use of EMP and neutron bomb weapons in a first strike scenario, which would have a broader effect than this weapon.
This PR is just meant to spook NK, but what'd REALLY spook em is to say we reverse-engineered the Cuba embassy attack weapon, and figured out how to use it undetected, from space, on Dear Leader's most trusted Generals/Advisers and make them go insane.

--
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
1. Re:B-2 Is Poor Choice In NK by mentil · 2017-12-07 17:23 · Score: 1
  
  B-52 is poor choice in nk*
  
  --
  Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
2. Re:B-2 Is Poor Choice In NK by AHuxley · 2017-12-07 17:53 · Score: 1
  
  B-52 has big new engines to consider. Relaxing glass cockpit for crew. Mission after mission over the sides of mountains hiding NK artillery.
  NK has no airforce so it won't be like Vietnam. Stealth will remove all SAM before b-52 arrive over NK.
  No need for anything fancy like Operation Bolo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
  Just keep the B-52 missions to a set and predictable 24/7 timetable. Just like stealth flights over Serbia.
  Keep crews working with stop-loss.
  
  --
  Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
3. Re:B-2 Is Poor Choice In NK by Hal_Porter · 2017-12-07 20:25 · Score: 1
  
  The US didn't need to reverse engineer the Cuba embassy weapon. Both the US and USSR knew about that technology for ages.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
  
  Wright's examination led to development of a similar British system codenamed SATYR, used throughout the 1950s by the British, Americans, Canadians and Australians.
  There were later models of the device, some with more complex internal structure (the center post under the membrane attached to a helix, probably to increase Q). Maximizing the Q-factor was one of the engineering priorities, as this allowed higher selectivity to the illuminating signal frequency, and therefore higher operating distance and also higher acoustic sensitivity.[8]
  The CIA ran a secret research program at the Dutch Radar Laboratory (NRP) in Noordwijk (Netherlands) from 1954 to approximately 1967 to create its own covert listening devices based on a dipole antenna with a detector diode (crystal) and a small microphone amplifier. The devices were developed under the Easy Chair research contract[9] and were known as Easy Chair Mark I (1955), Mark II (1956), Mark III (1958), Mark IV (1961) and Mark V (1962).[10] Although initially they could not get the resonant cavity microphone to work reliably, several products involving Passive Elements (PEs) were developed for the CIA as a result of the research. In 1965, the NRP finally got a reliably working pulsed cavity resonator, but by that time the CIA was no longer interested in passive devices, largely because of the high levels of RF energy involved.[11]
  Assuming the Cuban embassy sickness outbreak was caused by a microwave surveillance attempt, it was a very primitive one that used microwave beams powerful enough to have a biological effect rather like The Thing which the US did in 1945, and the US reverse engineered but lost interest because of the 'high levels of RF energy involved'.
  A competent attempt would have used something like spread spectrum ones below the noise floor which are unlikely to have a biological effect, or lasers or something.
  
  --
  echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
4. Re:B-2 Is Poor Choice In NK by drinkypoo · 2017-12-07 23:43 · Score: 1
  
  Also, it's a bit of an assumption that their ballistic missiles are aimed electronically rather than by turning mechanical wheels like old artillery.
  An ICBM isn't going to get where it's going without electronics. It might get somewhere, but no guarantees it'll go where you want it. That kind of thing is sometimes acceptable with conventional explosives, but never with nukes.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Faraday cages are completely unknown in N Korea by Required+Snark · 2017-12-07 17:33 · Score: 2

Also, they have never heard of aluminum foil or metal screen mesh.

--
Why is Snark Required?
1. Re:Faraday cages are completely unknown in N Korea by Baron_Yam · 2017-12-08 00:21 · Score: 1
  
  This weapon is useful against people who have progressed beyond purely mechanical/chemical weapons and are dependent on electronics... but who haven't quite caught on to shielding those electronics against EMPs.
  I mean, anyone who has heard of nukes has heard of the EMP they generate that fries electronics, right? What's a tiny HERF weapon compared to that when you're talking shielding?
2. Re:Faraday cages are completely unknown in N Korea by Ed_1024 · 2017-12-08 01:19 · Score: 1
  
  I agree. If you can design something to withstand direct lightning strikes, like an aircraft engine and its control unit, then microwaves are easy in comparison. You dont even have to make it perfectly as at microwave wavelengths even a loose mesh appears like a solid conductor (see ovens)...
  Sounds like another boondoggle.
3. Re:Faraday cages are completely unknown in N Korea by iggymanz · 2017-12-08 05:40 · Score: 1
  
  err, the target is systems with antennae...you know, the ones that have to emit and receive microwave radation
Re:The End Is Near by AHuxley · 2017-12-07 17:34 · Score: 1

Dont worry about it. The NSA and GCHQ have the phone numbers of all of NK command and control structure.
The CIA will do a deal and offer an Operation Paperclip escape deal.
During the fog of war all the high ranking mil of NK will just get to escape. No courts, why go looking for people who all stayed in tunnels and caves at the end of the war?
Another Kunduz airlift https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
A nice big payment and a new life anywhere.
The only part of the deal the NK mil has to keep is not to use all the systems NK has.
Conventional war is fine, just don't show up the US weakness by using a real ICBM.
The US mil can say its best new missile defense systems worked. The NK mil gets to escape.
Win, win for everyone. The US contractors can then sell a "working" war "tested" missile defense system to a lot of other nations.
A system that was never actually used but it looked good on TV.
The missile defense system will work on TV but due to the skill of the NSA, GCHQ, CIA offering a deal not any new science.
Deals will have been done to sabotage NK most advanced weapons systems from within.
The actual war will look a lot like Switzerland had planned for in the 1950's. Some artillery hidden in a cave pointed at fixed locations.
A big Dien Bien Phu with lots of artillery.

The only way for NK to stop that is to turn all its most trusted listening stations inwards and see who in its own command is now doing deals with the CIA.
For NK to win it has to replace its entire command and control staff with people still loyal to NK. The CIA has already made too many of the existing top level staff in NK a great offer.
No more cell phones. Thats how the NSA and GCHQ are allowing the CIA to make direct deals.
With no cell phones the CIA will be reverting back to its standard broadcasts over all NK mil frequencies to stand down. No as good as a direct call to the new top officials.
Someone just promoted in NK might actually follow orders then.

--
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Re:Faraday Cage by blindseer · 2017-12-07 17:40 · Score: 1

No, it wouldn't. Just like how a mirror doesn't defeat a powerful enough laser, because some of the energy still gets through.
I'm assuming the people designing the weapon thought of this. The skin of the rocket will presumably act as a Faraday cage on it's own. It will attenuate the RF but not block it all. Assuming the microwave generator is powerful enough then no Faraday cage could be made thick enough to defeat it and still be able to launch.
If for some reason the North Koreans are able to defeat this system the US Navy has something like 50 ships floating about with anti-ballistic missile systems. If this microwave weapon fails we'll just launch some SM-3 missiles at it. These ships exist to defend the USA and its allies against a Russian attack of thousands of ICBMs, I'm pretty sure we have a few to spare to shoot down a North Korean missile if they are stupid enough to actually launch an attack.
I seem to recall a failed launch some time ago where the missile failed not long after leaving the launch pad. No real damage was done but speculation is that this was shot down by US forces, it was a "planned failure" so as to not get the US upset too much, or an attack on the missile by Japan that even the US was not (and perhaps is still not) aware of. If Japan or the US is in possession of fully functional ship borne laser systems it's not like a count of missiles still in their tubes will reveal such an attack.

--
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Re:The End Is Near by blindseer · 2017-12-07 17:47 · Score: 1

And people make fun of me for building my anti-ballistic missile system. You'll thank me for it after I save the west coast from the North Korean nuclear fallout.

--
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Re:The End Is Near by Ungrounded+Lightning · 2017-12-07 17:50 · Score: 1

It is highly likely that if NK, or anyone else for that matter, launches an ICBM the first one will get through, showing these missile defense systems to be useless.
Also MAKING them useless.
All they need to do is set off a small one (a few kilotons) at the right altitude (which they've already reached - and ORBITED SATELLITES) over the central US, to EMP the whole North American continent.
That's why it doesn't particularly matter that their first fission nukes were pretty puny. Puny fission bombs are good for two things:
1) EMP
2) Igniting NON-puny FUSION bombs.

--
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Re:AJIT PAI == SHITTY SMELLY INDO-CHIMP by _merlin · 2017-12-07 17:55 · Score: 3, Informative

No he isn't. He's US-born, raised and educated, graduating from one of your prestigious law schools and working as a lawyer for a glorious US telecommunications megacorporation. He's American through-and-through.
Re:UFO by blindseer · 2017-12-07 18:00 · Score: 1

Maybe would actually work with flying saucers!
I have a Remington 870 loaded with bird shot for those. Microwaves don't work on those saucers at all unless they've got that old style gold paint trim on the edge to get them hot enough to crack while still flying through the air. Most saucers these days are microwave safe, they changed the chemistry in that paint now or something, best you'll get is a saucer that's a bit blackened and a chip from hitting the dirt. If you want to bust up some old saucers you've sent flying just use the shotgun. Trying to microwave them is fun and all but it gets expensive after a while from having to paint them with a metallic paint yourself. Especially if you are trying to save time with the kind in a spray can.
I mean, so I've heard.

--
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
CHAMP? Really? I can play too. by blindseer · 2017-12-07 18:08 · Score: 5, Funny

I get the impression that the military just grabs words out of a hat for the next weapon system and makes up an acronym to fit. I can do that too.
High
Energy
Radio
Output
Emitter
System
or
Weapon
Intercept for
Nuclear and
Non-nuclear
Enemy
Rockets
Who else wants to try? Here's a tough one: VICTORY

--
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Re:Two unnamed air force officials by Michael+Woodhams · 2017-12-07 18:08 · Score: 1

I was wondering about "made up". This could be a fake story intended to get NK running around trying to make countermeasures to a non-existent threat.

--
Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.
Re:Somebody forgot what B in ICBM stands for. by rwven · 2017-12-07 18:27 · Score: 1

RTFA. It's not about killing the missile itself. It's about frying everything at the launchpad(s).
Re:CHAMP? Really? I can play too. by blindseer · 2017-12-07 19:34 · Score: 1

That's cute but I don't see how that describes a weapon system.

--
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
By The Way, Thanks for the Announcement! by hcs_$reboot · 2017-12-07 19:35 · Score: 2

Now we have time to refine our missiles so that they're not micro-waves sensitive. Best, KJU

--
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
microwaves by cstacy · 2017-12-07 20:06 · Score: 2

The US Is Testing a Microwave Weapon To Stop North Korea's Missiles
Has it been testing it in Cuba?
1. Re:microwaves by WallyL · 2017-12-08 07:00 · Score: 1
  
  Came here to say this so fast, I forgot to log out of my sockpuppet account.
Re:CHAMP? Really? I can play too. by cstacy · 2017-12-07 20:08 · Score: 2

Make Acronyms Generic Again
Dear Slashdot by Hallux-F-Sinister · 2017-12-07 20:21 · Score: 5, Insightful

You really need to create a score of -2, to differentiate that which is merely offensive garbage that does not contribute meaningfully to a conversation and ... posts like this.

--
Our reign has gone on long enough. Indeed. Summon the meteors.
doesn't spell CHAMP by peas_n_carrots · 2017-12-07 22:00 · Score: 1

Counter-electronics High Power Microwave Advanced Missile Project =
CeHMPAMP
or at best
CHMAMP
At this point, why bother with matching abbreviations. Call it Big Microwave Shooter Missile, or CHAMP.
1. Re:doesn't spell CHAMP by coofercat · 2017-12-08 02:22 · Score: 1
  
  ..or just go with full-on propaganda - call it the PeaceMaker, or RainbowMaker or FluffyKitten, HammerDontHurtEm or BigHugs or some such.
2. Re:doesn't spell CHAMP by cyberchondriac · 2017-12-08 03:17 · Score: 1
  
  It seems like an unfortunate choice of name in any case: all it will take is one public failure in it's deployment (if it gets around to that) and it'll forever be known as "CHUMP".
  
  --
  
  Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
Just more finessing by Sqreater · 2017-12-07 23:00 · Score: 1

A Cuba-like embargo would have more effect possibly. And this is probably some program director trying to save his program by connecting it to a current threat, however ludicrous it may be to use it for THAT.

--
E Proelio Veritas.
Re:Stupidity by prefec2 · 2017-12-08 01:05 · Score: 1

Even a Fat Man needs electric components to trigger the initial explosion to trigger the bomb. However, the best thing would be to try diplomacy. Not Trump the lets pour oil in the fire diplomacy, real diplomacy is needed.
Re:CHAMP? Really? I can play too. by Photonmaker · 2017-12-08 01:47 · Score: 1

Vehicular Integration for C4ISR/EW Interoperability (VICTORY) - https://victory-standards.org/. Not a "go boom" system, but I did get the acronym.
As the saying goes... by DarthVain · 2017-12-08 02:09 · Score: 1

You're just being paranoid...
Yeah, that's only because everyone is out to kill me.
Re:CHAMP? Really? I can play too. by DarthVain · 2017-12-08 02:16 · Score: 1

Vectoring
Interdiction
Counter-measure
Trajectory
Ordnance
Ranged
Yankee
You could just as easily credit nukes by zerofoo · 2017-12-08 02:21 · Score: 1

"unprecedented state of stability"
I'm not sure I'd call the world's current state "stable", but I suppose the current state of affairs is better than nations declaring war and shooting at each other.
If that is your yardstick, then you could just as easily claim that the advent and proliferation of nuclear weapons is exactly what has kept WWIII from occurring.
1. Re:You could just as easily credit nukes by ceoyoyo · 2017-12-08 02:45 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Don't believe what the media tells you. The actual numbers say the world has less violence and is more stable today than it ever has been. It's been getting more so for a thousand years, even if you include the 20th century wars.
  When you go country-by-country, the factors that emerge as contributing to stability, peace and prosperity are engagement with the international community and international trade ties. The trends were present well before nukes were invented. Nukes may explain why we haven't had any of the largest kinds of wars recently, but they really don't work as a good explanation on any other level, even limited to post 1945: all the nuclear powers have been involved in wars, and several of them aren't or weren't exactly what you'd call stable or peaceful.
Next time, on WarGames, 2.0... by Jaegs · 2017-12-08 03:33 · Score: 1

WOPRJr.: General, I have detected the launch of a missile from North Korea. Designating contact as Mars-07.
General: Colonel, do we have that new microwave CHAMPs asset airborne.
Colonel: Yessir, it is ready and tracking the contact.
General: WOPRJr., nuke it!
WOPRJr.: Colonel, please affirm the General's order.
Colonel: Affirmative, WOPRJr.
WOPRJr.: Voice recognition confirmed. Initiating global thermonuclear warfare against North Korea.
General: NO, WOPRJr., NUKE JUST THE CONTACT NOT NORTH KOREA!
WOPRJr.: I'm sorry, Dave, but the missiles are already underway, so I cannot do that. Would you like to play a nice game of chess while we wait?
Re:AJIT PAI == SHITTY SMELLY INDO-CHIMP by wyHunter · 2017-12-08 09:07 · Score: 1

Never mind it's just another racist leftist.
Re:CHAMP? Really? I can play too. by blindseer · 2017-12-08 16:59 · Score: 1

Very
Intricate
Contraption
That
Offers
Radiological
Yummies
I believe we have a winner!

--
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Re:Faraday Cage by ebvwfbw · 2017-12-09 05:32 · Score: 1

Knowing about it and being able to defend against it are two different things. The US knows about it, has known since the 1950s when we discovered it and yet most of our stuff isn't protected.
Hell, we know about the Sun and how it could obliterate our electrical grid like it did in Canada and yet getting them to make obvious changes to mitigate this threat is like pulling teeth, no, it's like forcing 20 lbs of potatoes into a 5 lbs bag. Just can't do it. They won't do it. Even though the IEEE has written about it a bunch of times and how cheap it would be to fix given what would happen if the sun hit us.