Patterico's Pontifications

10/28/2007

And It Bawled Its Eyes Out After Bush v. Gore

Filed under: Humor,Judiciary,War — Patterico @ 12:00 am



Someone involved in the development of military intelligence systems must be a Supreme Court watcher with a wicked sense of humor.

How else to explain this?

The most recent rumors, of what enabled the Israelis to slip past Syria’s air defenses during the September 6th raid, describe a system that has been used in Iraq to detect transmissions from terrorist communications and zap IED detonation systems.

The system in question facilitates stealth attacks. It feeds the enemy misinformation, allowing friendly forces to slip past the enemy’s defenses and wreak havoc. It is described as difficult to identify and defeat, because of its continously changing nature.

And what is the name of this sneaky, stealthy, constantly evolving system?

Suter.

40 Responses to “And It Bawled Its Eyes Out After Bush v. Gore”

  1. The US systems were so far in advance of what the USSR could even conceive of in the 80’s, when they found out, they closed the, err, opened up the gates and gave up! Always nice to be able to teach them yet another lesson! Communism will NOT WORK! EVER!

    Next stop, Iran!

    Though I hope it’s just the Israelis that make such a move, I’ve no doubt they will make it and they will not take a decade to do so. They did not allow Saddam to create such, seems they did not allow Syria to posses such, and you can bet that pajama guy aint ever gonna achieve such either.

    Seems while we seep in bather, some folks STILL know how to make accomplishments happen. Though one might could bet we were not ignorant to what was about to happen either, we did not do it!

    TC (1cf350) — 10/28/2007 @ 2:27 am

  2. I thought suter was a left leaning Supreme court justice

    DD877 (4d67d1) — 10/28/2007 @ 5:39 am

  3. DD877–

    Uhhm..yeah…hence the pun involved in the title of this post……..

    gahrie (56a0a8) — 10/28/2007 @ 6:37 am

  4. What I’m not so clear on is whether Suter is of Israeli or American origin.

    Does anyone know?

    Eric (b85ee6) — 10/28/2007 @ 6:39 am

  5. Isn’t the name of the system a Biblical reference? I think I read that somewhere, maybe I’m confusing it with something else…

    The system is American-developed and Israeli-refined.

    chaos (9c54c6) — 10/28/2007 @ 8:52 am

  6. Eric #4:

    What I’m not so clear on is whether Suter is of Israeli or American origin.

    Does anyone know?

    American, looks like:

    Senior Suter is a Big Safari-managed special access program. Big Safari itself is a shadowy Air Force unit that has developed small numbers of specialized reconnaissance systems, including drones, in what are often classified programs. The Suter technology was developed during the last several years by BAE Systems and involves invading enemy communications networks and computer systems, particularly those associated with integrated air defense systems (AW&ST Aug. 16, 2004, p. 24; Nov. 4, 2002, p. 30). Suter 1 allowed U.S. operators to monitor what enemy radars could see. The capability enables U.S. forces to assess the effectiveness of their stealth systems or terrain-masking tactics. Suter 2 permits U.S. operators to take control of enemy networks as system managers and actually manipulate the sensors, steering them away from penetrating U.S. aircraft. Suter 3 was tested last summer to add the ability to invade the links to time-critical targets, such as battlefield ballistic missile launchers or mobile surface-to-air missile launchers. Aircraft involved in the Suter programs include the EC-130 Compass Call, RC-135 Rivet Joint and F-16CJ strike aircraft specialized for suppression of enemy air defenses.

    Aviation Now

    Itsme (82f216) — 10/28/2007 @ 9:59 am

  7. Oops, looks like chaos beat me to it.

    Itsme (82f216) — 10/28/2007 @ 9:59 am

  8. This post made me laugh out loud because – from the standpoint of irony – it captures Justice David Souter perfectly. What a shame he has the same name (phonetically) as Col. Richard “Moody” Suter, a Vietnam war aviator, the designer of Red Flag (the Air Force’s premier combat training exercise), and the driving force behind the Checkmate war games scenario. I suspect this system was really named for Col. Suter and, given his contributions to the Air Force, I can’t think of a better or more appropriate person to honor by naming it for him.

    DRJ (5c60fb) — 10/28/2007 @ 10:56 am

  9. Thanks!

    I see the article heavily sources William Arkin. I have no idea how credible he is for technical data, but he’s taken a beating in the past from righty bloggers for some pretty virulent anti-military stuff he posted on a WaPo blog.

    Eric (b85ee6) — 10/28/2007 @ 11:07 am

  10. “I see the article heavily sources William Arkin”

    Arkin agrees with William Westmoreland on the all volunteer army: “an army of mercenaries.”

    Start here and work your way back.

    blah (74fc41) — 10/28/2007 @ 12:02 pm

  11. Arkin agrees with William Westmoreland on the all volunteer army: “an army of mercenaries.”

    What an understatement.

    The linked blog post from Arkin moved Charles Johnson from Little Green Footballs to call it an ugly leftist anti-military rant and inspired Iowahawk to pen this satirical debate classic.

    Johnson says this about Arkin:

    William Arkin, the former “military affairs columnist” for the Los Angeles Times, has a first-class hard left pedigree, having also worked for the Institute for Policy Studies (an affiliate of the Workers World Party and International ANSWER), Greenpeace, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and Human Rights Watch—none of which, oddly enough, is mentioned in his biography page.

    A taste of what Arkin wrote in The Troops Also Need to Support the American People.

    These soldiers should be grateful that the American public, which by all polls overwhelmingly disapproves of the Iraq war and the President’s handling of it, do still offer their support to them, and their respect.

    Through every Abu Ghraib and Haditha, through every rape and murder, the American public has indulged those in uniform, accepting that the incidents were the product of bad apples or even of some administration or command order.

    Sure it is the junior enlisted men who go to jail, but even at anti-war protests, the focus is firmly on the White House and the policy. We just don’t see very man “baby killer” epithets being thrown around these days, no one in uniform is being spit upon.

    So, we pay the soldiers a decent wage, take care of their families, provide them with housing and medical care and vast social support systems and ship obscene amenities into the war zone for them, we support them in every possible way, and their attitude is that we should in addition roll over and play dead, defer to the military and the generals and let them fight their war, and give up our rights and responsibilities to speak up because they are above society?

    I can imagine some post-9/11 moment, when the American people say enough already with the wars against terrorism and those in the national security establishment feel these same frustrations. In my little parable, those in leadership positions shake their heads that the people don’t get it, that they don’t understand that the threat from terrorism, while difficult to defeat, demands commitment and sacrifice and is very real because it is so shadowy, that the very survival of the United States is at stake. Those Hoover’s and Nixon’s will use these kids in uniform as their soldiers. If I weren’t the United States, I’d say the story end with a military coup where those in the know, and those with fire in their bellies, save the nation from the people.

    But it is the United States and instead this NBC report is just an ugly reminder of the price we pay for a mercenary – oops sorry, volunteer – force that thinks it is doing the dirty work.

    After a predictable blasting by the milblogs among many other prominent right-leaning blogs and his comment section, he wrote The Arrogant and Intolerant Speak Out.

    I was dead wrong in using the word mercenary to describe the American soldier today.

    These men and women are not fighting for money with little regard for the nation. The situation might be much worse than that: Evidently, far too many in uniform believe that they are the one true nation. They hide behind the constitution and the flag and then spew an anti-Democrat, anti-liberal, anti-journalism, anti-dissent, and anti-citizen message that reflects a certain contempt for the American people.

    After publishing that post, the WaPo probably called him on the carpet and left him with hardly any hindquarters, because he posted A Note to My Readers on Supporting the Troops.

    Paul (66339f) — 10/28/2007 @ 12:47 pm

  12. Start here and work your way back.

    Yup…that’s the one I was thinking of. The infamous “obscene amenities” column.

    Eric (b85ee6) — 10/28/2007 @ 1:13 pm

  13. Eric #9:

    Hmm, dunno. I picked the article because it seemed to have pretty good info on the background of the system, but I know nothing about William Arkin.

    Here’s what his mini-bio at the WaPo says:

    William M. Arkin writes about national and homeland security affairs. Arkin is a former military intelligence analyst and author of more than ten books on the military.

    Early Warning

    Itsme (82f216) — 10/28/2007 @ 1:19 pm

  14. Here’s what his mini-bio at the WaPo says

    Which is why I quoted Johnson’s bio info on Arkin, because none of it is included in the WaPo bio.

    Paul (66339f) — 10/28/2007 @ 1:25 pm

  15. Paul #13:

    Sorry, am I missing something? I don’t see that posted in this thread….

    Itsme (82f216) — 10/28/2007 @ 2:12 pm

  16. Itsme:

    I have a long comment that may not have shown up yet on your screen. It should be comment #13, instead of the one you responded to, which should be comment #14.

    Paul (66339f) — 10/28/2007 @ 2:33 pm

  17. I found Paul’s comment in moderation and approved it. I assume it will show up soon …

    DRJ (5c60fb) — 10/28/2007 @ 2:33 pm

  18. Paul,

    I’m not a moderator here so I don’t generally deal with comments, and I’m not sure what happened to your comment. I’m sorry if I inadvertently lost it.

    Update: I think it showed up as comment 11. Whew!

    DRJ (5c60fb) — 10/28/2007 @ 2:39 pm

  19. “the Institute for Policy Studies (an affiliate of the Workers World Party and International ANSWER)”
    Absolute bullshit.
    “Previously, Arkin served as Senior Military Adviser to Human Rights Watch, the largest international human rights and law organization in the United States, and was a columnist for The Los Angeles Times. From 1985 – 2002, he wrote the “Last Word” column in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, and co-authored the bi-monthly NRDC “Nuclear Notebook.” He contributed to the yearbook of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) from 1984 – 2002, was a contributing editor for Laser Report and has written on technical military matters for the trade newsletter Defense Daily. Arkin also served previously as a Visiting Fellow at the Center for Strategic Education at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) in Washington, DC, and was an Adjunct at the School of Advanced Air and Space Studies, U.S. Air Force, Maxwell AFB, Alabama.”

    blah (74fc41) — 10/28/2007 @ 2:48 pm

  20. Absolute bulls***.

    Care to reveal your source for that bio?

    Paul (66339f) — 10/28/2007 @ 3:02 pm

  21. I think it’s from Arkin’s bio at the Washington Post but there’s a lengthier version at his book publisher’s website.

    DRJ (5c60fb) — 10/28/2007 @ 3:08 pm

  22. Sorry guys, I have to hit on this again:

    “the Institute for Policy Studies (an affiliate of the Workers World Party and International ANSWER)”
    Absolute bulls***.

    From Wikipedia:

    Arkin served in the United States Army from 1974 to 1978. He received a BS from the University of Maryland. He has held positions at the Institute for Policy Studies, Center for Defense Information, Greenpeace, the Natural Resources Defense Council and Human Rights Watch.

    Paul (66339f) — 10/28/2007 @ 3:20 pm

  23. Oh, by the way, some of Arkin’s earlier antics in the Dog Trainer have been chonicled by none other than Patterico in the early days of this blog:

    The Dog Trainer’s New “Air Quote” Policy
    A Primer on How to Read the Los Angeles Times–Lesson Two: Don’t Take Anything at Face Value

    Paul (66339f) — 10/28/2007 @ 3:28 pm

  24. So blah, you told me to get to work and do some research.

    Aren’t you happy?

    Paul (66339f) — 10/28/2007 @ 3:30 pm

  25. Paul, thanks for the explanation. I see your comment did show up at #11, as DRJ pointed out.

    I guess I should have picked a different article explaining the development of the Suter program, because Arkin’s name seems to set off some alarms for people.

    However, as his book was evidently cited only for the history of the naming of certain projects, not for any point of controversy, I’m not sure where the controversy would arise here.

    Itsme (82f216) — 10/28/2007 @ 3:42 pm

  26. I guess I should have picked a different article explaining the development of the Suter program, because Arkin’s name seems to set off some alarms for people.

    There’s nothing wrong with citing the article, Itsme. The Avaition Now authors merely cited his book on military equpiment, not his op-ed pieces.

    Paul (66339f) — 10/28/2007 @ 3:56 pm

  27. Exactly. Which is why I’m a little puzzled about the flurry of posts about Arkin’s politics.

    Itsme (82f216) — 10/28/2007 @ 3:59 pm

  28. Arkin agrees with William Westmoreland

    That wouldn’t be GENERAL Westmoreland, would it?

    Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 10/28/2007 @ 4:01 pm

  29. To me #27:

    I guess it evolved out of a comment Eric made about Arkin’s views. Okay.

    Itsme (82f216) — 10/28/2007 @ 4:03 pm

  30. Which is why I’m a little puzzled about the flurry of posts about Arkin’s politics.

    Because Eric asked if it was the same Arkin, and blah linked the original WaPo blog post without explaining the controversy surrounding it.

    Paul (66339f) — 10/28/2007 @ 4:06 pm

  31. Sorry, Itsme, I see we cross-posted.

    Paul (66339f) — 10/28/2007 @ 4:07 pm

  32. Yes, I saw and posted afterwards. Thanks.

    Itsme (82f216) — 10/28/2007 @ 4:08 pm

  33. Sorry, Itsme, I see we cross-posted.

    Oops, yep.

    Itsme (82f216) — 10/28/2007 @ 4:08 pm

  34. I wonder why my comments are showing up before yours ? Ah well, ’tis a mystery.

    Itsme (82f216) — 10/28/2007 @ 4:09 pm

  35. “…an affiliate of the Workers World Party and International ANSWER)”
    That’s the bullshit. I have no problem with the IPS.

    “That wouldn’t be GENERAL Westmoreland, would it?”
    Yes dear.

    blah (74fc41) — 10/28/2007 @ 4:26 pm

  36. “

    That wouldn’t be GENERAL Westmoreland, would it?”

    Yes dear.

    Well, there’s yer problem…

    Only person less fit to have anything to do with the military would be MacNamara…

    Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 10/28/2007 @ 4:30 pm

  37. “…an affiliate of the Workers World Party and International ANSWER)”
    That’s the bullshit. I have no problem with the IPS.

    Tell it to Charles Johnson at LGF if that affiliation is incorrect. I simply quoted him.

    Paul (66339f) — 10/28/2007 @ 4:42 pm

  38. One recall his most recent book; which detailed every code word indentified program he could think of; and published every detail he knew about them. That was possibly the most irres-ponsible thing he did; not neccessarily the
    most despicable; that alternates with the above mentioned Washington post piece, and his burning
    Gen. Boykin

    narciso (d671ab) — 10/28/2007 @ 6:05 pm

  39. One recall his most recent book; which detailed every code word indentified program he could think of; and published every detail he knew about them.

    Back when we had a pair, we tossed people in a hole at Leavenworth for that…

    If we didn’t shoot them.

    Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 10/28/2007 @ 6:40 pm

  40. I vote for the hole, and just walk away.
    He isn’t worth the gunpowder.

    Another Drew (8018ee) — 10/29/2007 @ 4:24 pm


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0974 secs.