[lit-ideas] Re: Hitchens on Moore's flick
- From: Scribe1865@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 18:14:11 EDT
In a message dated 7/2/2004 2:18:04 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
Robert.Paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
Is this is meant to be evidence supporting Eric's initial claim, the claim
that several of us questioned? The subtext here is that Clinton sold MIRV
technology?
http://www.hciottawa.ca/news/misc/980819-2.html
Extracts from the speech made by Mr. Benjamin Gilman, Chairman of the US
House International Relations Committee, on July 28, 1998
.. In addition to China's mischief, there are distressing reports on how US
assistance to communist China may have helped Beijing develop MIRV (multiple
individual reentry vehicle) technology. ....
_____
http://www.softwar.net/missile.html
Launches 1996-7 and 1998 (successful) Motorola Iridium (Lockheed)
Specific Technology Transferred Validated Chinese upper stage separation
technology, vibrational and load coupling analysis, attitude control, and
payload
mounting. Two Motorola communication satellites were to be delivered with a
kick motor and new satellite dispenser of Chinese design. To assure successful
launch, the contractor demanded that the Chinese prove that the Chinese systems
would work properly and do the job. Concerns included the properly timed
release of the satellites, the mounting of the satellites in the delivery bus
(would the two satellites break from their moorings due to improper vibrational
and load coupling analysis), would the delivery bus's attitude control be
destabilized by the release of the fast satellite, and would the kick motor
generate
too little or too much thrust at the wrong time.
Military Significance
Helped China master the technology needed to develop its own multiple
independently targetable re, entry vehicles for the new solid rocket
intercontinental
ballistic missile it is trying to drive from SS-25 missile technology with
the Russians.
SOURCE: Beyond The Loral-Hughes Controversy: A Decade of US Satellite
Transfers And Their Military Significance, by Henry Sokolski, Executive
Director, The
Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, 1-202-466-4406
_____
And finally http://usembassy-australia.state.gov/hyper/WF980715/epf304.htm
Note that Bacon says that Motorola only provided "information." And disputes
the required accuracy of the MIRV, even though that has subsequently been
shown not to be the case. -EY
_____
TRANSCRIPT: PENTAGON REGULAR BRIEFING, JULY 14, 1998
(China, Japan, Kosovo, Yeltsin, Cyprus, Pakistan, Israel) (5340)
Pentagon Spokesman Kenneth Bacon briefed.
Following is the Defense Department transcript:
(begin transcript)
DoD News Briefing
Tuesday, July 14, 1998 --
[Bacon:] The Chinese have developed a satellite dispenser system as the
article pointed out. Motorola used that satellite dispenser system to launch
more
than one satellite simultaneously.
What Motorola did was simply provide information that was necessary to attach
its satellites to the dispenser system that the Chinese already had
developed. Launching more than one satellite at a time is not particularly
complex
technology. It does not require the same degree of accuracy to launch
satellites
into an orbit as it does to launch multiple warheads into orbits. Whether they
are MIRVs which are independently targetable warheads, or whether they're
multiple reentry vehicles. The recent talk has been about MIRVs which require a
much greater degree of accuracy in terms of being placed precisely into an
orbit, than it would require to put a satellite into an orbit.
So what Motorola did was provide, after government review, technology that
allowed -- it didn't provide technology, it provided information that allowed
them to attach satellites to a dispenser they'd already designed. They didn't
design this with Motorola's help.
Q: So the dispenser was, as far as you know, was indigenous Chinese
technology...
A: That is my understanding, that they already had the dispenser.
Q: The Washington Times article quotes a former Pentagon weapons
proliferation official as saying that in fact the satellite dispensing
technology is
interchangeable with MIRV technology.
A: I just told you that releasing, or parking a satellite in orbit does not
require nearly as much precision as releasing multiple warheads does. I think
it's not the same technology.
Q: Your understanding of the dispensing system that is only accurate enough
to deal with a satellite?
A: It does not have the extreme accuracy that's required for independent
targeted warheads to be released as a group, yes.
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
