4 ms·
No, it's propaganda.
by mikejb 9y ago
No, it's propaganda.
- mythrwy 9y agoI'm not sure it is. http://securethegrid.com/2014/04/03/video-65/ http://securethegrid.com/2014/04/03/video-65/ He's been on this topic for some time. But cynicism is entirely understandable. https://www.amazon.com/Dr.-Peter-Vincent-Pry/e/B00IUMVT0A https://www.amazon.com/Dr.-Peter-Vincent-Pry/e/B00IUMVT0A
- mikejb 9y agoI believe it is. Here's the picture he paints: 1. North Korea attacks other nations 2. Hero-Entrance 'MURICA 3. North Korea goes "OMG we didn't think this would happen" 4. NK falls apart and deploys secret kamikaze-style weapon to cause serious shit in the US With the final assumption that everybody will be OK with this, and NK emerges as victors. It just drives the picture that NK would be a serious thread to the US, and attempts to justify destroying other state's property ("shoot down those North Korean satellites") for "defense".
- mythrwy 9y agoYou might watch his technical assessment of threats. There was enough there I paused for a few moments, even if he is mostly selling books and trying to keep a commission seat. I tend to agree there isn't an excuse not to harden some of our infrastructure against this type of attack.
- mikejb 9y agoI agree that hardening infrastructure against attacks (not just EMPs) is important. But that is only one of two requests made in the article. The other one is about shooting down a satellite owned & operated by another nation, an unprecedented request that - if executed - could be seen as an act of war. (Imagine if NK destroys a US satellite...)