Comments on: Spy Radar Satellites Declassified

By: Larry Fischer USN

Larry Fischer USN — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 20:23:02 +0000

I still believe Military Intelligence is an “Oxymoron”! If you want the latest intelligence watch the 5 o’clock news. why is it that our country and news especially shoot their mouths off about things,that are OBVIOUSLY a demise to “OUR” security and safety in this country, without thinking twice!

By: Kevin JB

Kevin JB — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 20:05:01 +0000

It’s a good way to get networking started to improve and develop more uses for the system in place. Make it available to the force, and allies (limited) and there can be a huge potential to improve the effectiveness of groundbased robotic systems, UAVs, etc. all taking advantage of this system, devloping more reliance, and thus contributing to redevelopment and improvements to the system. Use or lose it, as is often said, and why not? If it works, make it work hard, for as many applications as possible, that’s rationalization and evolution, and don’t beg the question why we wouldn’t want to keep our allied forces at top effectiveness.

By: Steve

Steve — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 18:37:43 +0000

There is clearly a need to enable all the services to work together and get the intel. they need to accomplish their various missions. That said, we cannot letup on our precautions. We have given the Chi coms so much information because of the stupidity of previous administrations and treasonous acts by individuals, that they are far ahead of where they should be on multiple fronts. We are funding our enemies through the guise of capitalism and it’s going to kill us.

By: Rick O.

Rick O. — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 11:55:26 +0000

Several comments represent the thoughtful process by which the “fact of” SAR reconnaissance satellites was declassified with the concurrence of the affected intelligence agencies. As one writer offered, no other details except that “fact” were declassified — no history, nor numbers, nor technology, nor operations.

By: Kevin Serril

Kevin Serril — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 03:18:35 +0000

I suggest that the people complaining here go back and read the article. To answer some of the questions posted here:

1-Was this a ‘leak’? No, the article quotes a government spokesperson about a change in policy. The government was releasing the information on its own.

2-Why was the government releasing this information? Because a) they knew that the “fact of” the government operating radar satellites is already known, and b) they decided that for operational purposes, they needed to make this policy change. If you know about the Space Radar program, you know that the USAF and the NRO are being urged/forced to cooperate on a future space radar program. According to the spokesperson, it was a problem that they held meetings with the USAF and they cannot even admit that they currently operate a space radar system.

3-Is it necessary to keep _all_ details secret? No. The important information is the technical details of the satellites. That is still classified. If the job is national security, and the government says that this aspect of secrecy was getting in the way of them doing their job, then what is the problem?

By: Chuck Eiland (SFC-Ret)

Chuck Eiland (SFC-Ret) — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 20:25:32 +0000

I agree with T. On'neill, everythime we turn on the tv, there is yet something else we're blabbing about. Some things the public just doesn't need to know. We always rush to get our latest "Top Secret" project on the news some we can impress , Who?? Like they told us when i was in, "You don't have the need to know"

By: Steve Miller

Steve Miller — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 18:31:24 +0000

Anyone who’s been involved in any compartmentalized program knows the difficulty, expense, and stress caused by keeping these programs strictly black. When the Soviet Union was still intact, it probably made sense for this level of security, but the cost and technical issues of large programs continue to be their greatest defense from anyone wishing us harm. By allowing technical experts to talk to each other about possible solutions without unneeded levels of security, our overall national defense is greatly enhanced. When I was in the Air Force, we knew these programs existed but never knew the the specifics. When I entered industry and entered the SCI world, it became clear why certain classified and unclassified programs needed to do what they did. At the same time, there were a number of solutions on the unclassified side that could have helped the black programs if we’d only had the “tickets”. By keeping these programs TOP SECRET they’re still protected, but the need for withholding even their existence is nonsense.

By: Tom O'Neill

Tom O'Neill — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 16:40:45 +0000

Why does everyone have to know everything about our military. Does Congress and the Pentagon want to self destruct. We became a SUPER Power because we did not discuss all of our SECRETS in the newspapers or on TV. We had an edge years ago, now the ENEMY (CHINA and other rogue States) are getting the edge on us. instead of learning Spanish, we had better learn Chinese or Arabic because they are going to bury us if we don’t stop this foolish.

By: Paul

Paul — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 20:03:13 +0000

I truly could blame the above article fairly
on some:Navy IT’s.…Thats how they hacked this machine,multiple times.…And old school RM’s.
And if wrong,it would still be near them!Blocks
are a strange breed of intrance.

By: Paul

Paul — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 17:05:58 +0000

It could be a leak right?And especially notice
the word:Synthetic aperture radar!Nor is an civilian agency:“a combat unit.” And the worst
part is:“lets quit trying to protect this information etc.”

By: CTR1(SW)

CTR1(SW) — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 14:35:07 +0000

p.s.
Paul asked, “Why unveil this?”

The reasons given in the article are good. 1) Our use of radar sats is well known even amongst our enemies. 2) Maintaining a high degree of classification is too expensive given that it is no longer necessary. And 3) The degree of classification was hindering the advancement of the technology.

By: CTR1(SW)

CTR1(SW) — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 14:21:14 +0000

The term “declassified” may be slightly misleading. It’s use sounds like there is no longer any classification to the system or data, yet later I in the article I get the impression that only the “SCI” has been removed.
The removal of SCI does not mean that information is now “street available.” It is still probable that the systems and information are at the secret or top secret level.
This article needs some clarification. (Although, why be too specific when the “bad guys” could be reading. Opsec, opsec, opsec!)

By: Paul

Paul — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 17:50:38 +0000

Why unveil this?