... and only an elderly Sterno drinker & a colicky baby will survive!

I_C_Weener: Top men? Who are these top men?

Top. Men.

I_C_Weener

Top men? Who are these top men?

Top men. That's all you need to know.

/what's that from? Someone help me out here

TheWizard: I_C_Weener: Top men? Who are these top men?

Top. Men.

Bureaucratic fools.

Are people really still buying that hydrazine story? I guess no one ever bothered to read the MSDS on that. Plus they said the tank was ruptured, so it's not like any of it would survive re-entry.

/Baaaaaa!

So. If we are to avoid the biggest debacle since Barcelona, we must act quickly. Samandrea, you will compile a roster of anything with unfired retro-rockets in near-earth orbit. It does not matter what company, government, or international organization claims ownership; just get the damn list to Broadbranch in Emergency Acquisitions, cross-referenced with time-to-orbit for the following vectors. Also, get that idiot Alexei to estimate the survivability of a quarter-no, make that a half-kilo of weaponized plutonium entering the atmosphere in all possible insertion patterns for the orbits in this sitrep.

Not that I'd want to be in a coastal city if we screw this up.

It wasn't even a satellite. It was a spaceship coming to warn us about the lizard people and Bush is one of the lizard people.

Have they considered the Hammer Down option?

Just in case things get out of control. All ideas need to be on the table.

Siamese Bream: I_C_Weener

Top men? Who are these top men?

Top men. That's all you need to know.

/what's that from? Someone help me out here

The end of the first Indiana Jones movie.

Next best thing to a hazmat suit: Tinfoil hat. Got yours, subby?

Are people really still buying that hydrazine story? I guess no one ever bothered to read the MSDS on that. Plus they said the tank was ruptured, so it's not like any of it would survive re-entry.

You don't have to believe the satellite was carrying nukes, or super secret alien technology, or whatever to think that the whole shoot-down exercise was fishy. After all, the Chinese shot down a satellite recently...this is the Pentagon's way of saying, "Yo, we got that tech too."

lefande: Siamese Bream: I_C_Weener

Top men? Who are these top men?

Top men. That's all you need to know.

/what's that from? Someone help me out here

The end of the first Indiana Jones movie.

Thank you, that was driving me crazy.

/short trip
//do they have hazmat teams for other drugs also?

Dashiki: TheWizard: I_C_Weener: Top men? Who are these top men?

Top. Men.

Bureaucratic fools.

They don't know what they've got there.

They surmise the satellite's destruction, which cost tens of millions of dollars, was to prevent top-secret spy technology falling into the wrong hands.

That says it all right there. The HAZMAT team is just a cover. They want people to think it's dangerous so they stay away. The HAZMAT team exists to snatch up any super secret spy technology that may have survived.

I'm not sure why anyone thinks they can't be completely upfront about the motives and intentions behind all this. Everyone already knows it's a spy satellite. Is anyone going to blame the government if it says "we shot it down so no one else could get our technology"?

rocinante721: ... and only an elderly Sterno drinker & a colicky baby will survive!

Great reference- and now I need a new keyboard from the spit out soda.

The Third Man: Are people really still buying that hydrazine story? I guess no one ever bothered to read the MSDS on that. Plus they said the tank was ruptured, so it's not like any of it would survive re-entry.

You don't have to believe the satellite was carrying nukes, or super secret alien technology, or whatever to think that the whole shoot-down exercise was fishy. After all, the Chinese shot down a satellite recently...this is the Pentagon's way of saying, "Yo, we got that tech too."

Haven't we had this tech since the 1980's? Do we really need to let China know what they already know?

Nothing to see here. Move along.

TommyymmoT: Here's the video of the actual (supposedly) shoot down of the satellite.

Link (new window)
====================
No, you're not being Rick Rolled, that was old a long time ago.
Sigh...I wish that Fark hadn't chased most of the creative people away, in order to be child and corporate friendly.

You can only look at so many pictures of cats, pictures captioned FAIL, and Simpsons screen shots.

did you see obama's notes from the debate last night?

It's like the military was sitting around a table and saying

General 1: We don't want that technology to fall into enemy hands.

General 2: Even though everyone knows there is sensitive technology on that bird we don't want to admit it.

General 1: What excuse can we use to shoot it down?

Intern: Isn't hydrazine dangerous?

General 1 and 2: Brilliant!

What I don't get about all the hubbub about the big bad satellite fuel tank is that from what I understand about hydrazine, it is really nasty stuff yet if it is mixed with enough water it becomes harmless. Having it fall into the ocean shouldn't be any worry at all.

It was a Thanatos device...god help us all.

garumph: It's like the military was sitting around a table and saying

General 1: We don't want that technology to fall into enemy hands.

General 2: Even though everyone knows there is sensitive technology on that bird we don't want to admit it.

General 1: What excuse can we use to shoot it down?

Intern: Isn't hydrazine dangerous?

General 1 and 2: Brilliant!

Or it was a completely benign satellite that was used as an excuse to test our missile defense capabilities without hearing protests from other countries. And it worked beautifully.

What's wrong with wanting to protect our country from missile attacks? Absolutely nothing. The other nuclear powers are just pissy because it neuters their ICMB capability against us.

kntgsp: ICMB

ICBM

Came here for the Andromeda Strain references, and goddam, WAS NOT DISAPPOINTED.

+1 to rocinante721!!

asmodeus224: It was a Thanatos device...god help us all.

We think they're looking in exotic circumlunar orbits.

By hydrazine we mean radioactive debris. Luckily much of that will land in the ocean, hopefully some place deep. You know, so we can't be directly blamed for whatever crawls out of the ocean later.

OH NOES!!!!1!

rocinante721: ... and only an elderly Sterno drinker & a colicky baby will survive!

Next time, I will read the entire thread before posting.

*GOLF CLAP*

kntgsp: The other nuclear powers are just pissy because it neuters their ICBM capability against us.

Hardly. There are pathetically easy ways to defeat the current ABM technology. Throw a few decoys in with the real warhead or shoot the ICBM on a depressed trajectory and the warhead will make it through.

I'm starting to think that there actually is nothing important on this satelite and that the U.S. is just trying to look tough.

rocinante721 ... and only an elderly Sterno drinker & a colicky baby will survive!

I came for the Andromeda Strain references and got one on the Boobies. Thank you.

Why do they show a picture of people in FRANCE, when we are talking about people in New Jersey? Are the reporters to lazy to go take a farking picture?

kntgsp: garumph: It's like the military was sitting around a table and saying

General 1: We don't want that technology to fall into enemy hands.

General 2: Even though everyone knows there is sensitive technology on that bird we don't want to admit it.

General 1: What excuse can we use to shoot it down?

Intern: Isn't hydrazine dangerous?

General 1 and 2: Brilliant!

Or it was a completely benign satellite that was used as an excuse to test our missile defense capabilities without hearing protests from other countries. And it worked beautifully.

What's wrong with wanting to protect our country from missile attacks? Absolutely nothing. The other nuclear powers are just pissy because it neuters their ICMB capability against us.

We know it was a spy satellite. The military has admitted that. So there is sensitive tech on it. Why the secrecy is stupid.

My take: It is sensitive information, we have the technology to shoot it out of the sky, we want to test it. Let's do it.

The safety crap just feeds the tin-foil hat crowd.

Befuddled: kntgsp: The other nuclear powers are just pissy because it neuters their ICBM capability against us.

Hardly. There are pathetically easy ways to defeat the current ABM technology. Throw a few decoys in with the real warhead or shoot the ICBM on a depressed trajectory and the warhead will make it through.

That's nothing sophisticated, it's just numbers. So launch more intercept missiles. There's a limit to how many decoys you can pack into an ICBM, but not in how many intercept missiles you can launch from the ground.

I wonder how long from now we are going to hear about a Russian or Chinese spy satellite that goes missing with the US getting blamed for shooting it down from somewhere out in the vast Pacific Ocean?

wh0mprat: So. If we are to avoid the biggest debacle since Barcelona, we must act quickly. Samandrea, you will compile a roster of anything with unfired retro-rockets in near-earth orbit.

While you're at it, get me a list of everyone who's seen the Sound of Music more than 4 times.

/not obscure on Fark, I hope

This whole satellite incident keeps setting off my BS detector. I have no idea what the real story is. But I have a good idea of what it is not.

Shakey

We know it was a spy satellite. The military has admitted that. So there is sensitive tech on it. Why the secrecy is stupid.

My take: It is sensitive information, we have the technology to shoot it out of the sky, we want to test it. Let's do it.

The safety crap just feeds the tin-foil hat crowd.

Any SPY satellite would be considered "sensitive technology" that shouldn't fall into enemy hands. But admitting that we have a potential weakness is something the military rarely, if ever does. Saying that it has dangerous chemicals on board allows them to avoid sacrificing their image of invulnerability.

It's "oh we're doing you guys a favor so no when gets sick when the chemicals burn up and crash in your back yard" as opposed to "we're going to lose a precious piece of spy technology to our rivals unless we blow up our own device"

When it comes to destroying their own items, the military will everything to avoid seeming incompetent or impotent.

And dangerous chemicals is much less damaging PR-wise than super secret technology falling into enemy hands.

Befuddled: kntgsp: The other nuclear powers are just pissy because it neuters their ICBM capability against us.

Hardly. There are pathetically easy ways to defeat the current ABM technology. Throw a few decoys in with the real warhead or shoot the ICBM on a depressed trajectory and the warhead will make it through.

And that potential method of defeating missile defense systems relies on the idea that only ONE intercept missile is fired at the ICBM. ICBM splits into three warheads and you have a 1/3 shot, or 10 warheads and a 1/10 shot.

Either way, with the defense budget what it is, putting a couple dozen hundred intercept missiles at every station is easily within the realm of possibility.

kntgsp: kntgsp: ICMB

ICBM

ICMB

/pet peave