DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • PEO Soldier
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Those Nutty Norks » Kang Nam 1 Mystery Trip

Kang Nam 1 Mystery Trip

kang-nam1.jpg

Underway for two weeks now, North Korea’s unim­pos­ing mer­chant ship Kang Nam 1 con­tin­ues her mys­tery trip through the South China Sea at a sedate 10 knots. I expect this is for bet­ter fuel econ­omy but not because her cap­tain or Kim Jong Il want to be green. According to the Associated Press, anony­mous U.S. intel­li­gence sources said on Tuesday that she altered course back north and is now about 250 miles south of Hong Kong.

Kang Nam 1 is believed by some Western author­i­ties to pos­si­bly be bound, or at least orig­i­nally have been bound, for Myanmar with an export ship­ment of con­ven­tional arms — maybe mor­tars, or per­haps mis­sile parts. Herein lies the rub. After Kim’s second-​​ever atom bomb test in May, the UN passed a res­o­lu­tion, bind­ing on all mem­ber states, which gives the appear­ance of estab­lish­ing a quar­an­tine against mar­itime trans­port of arms or nuclear-​​related items for sale by the DPRK. But the res­o­lu­tion lacks teeth. If Kang Nam 1 can some­how make it to a friendly des­ti­na­tion (Myanmar, or back to her start­ing point of Nampo, or some­where else) with­out refu­el­ing in a third-​​party pro-​​UN port such as Singapore, noth­ing stands in her way.

A U.S. Navy spokesman indi­cated a lack of good data on both the ship’s fuel mileage and the capac­ity of her fuel tanks, though pre­sum­ably experts can make basic esti­mates. It’s unclear to me from pub­lic accounts whether Kang Nam 1 was pro­vided before depar­ture with extra fuel, a large cache of which could sim­ply take the form of fuel drums crammed into some of her holds. It’s also unclear what might hap­pen if she’s met in inter­na­tional waters, in rea­son­ably calm weather, by another North Korean-​​flagged ship, civil­ian or naval, that could con­duct a prim­i­tive but effec­tive under­way replen­ish­ment. Kang Nam 1 has been trailed from beyond the hori­zon by a U.S. Navy destroyer, but the U.S. is pro­ceed­ing very cau­tiously about mak­ing any sort of demand to board and inspect the cargo.

David Sanger of the New York Times sug­gests that Kang Nam 1’s voy­age might be a provo­ca­tion designed to embar­rass America. I’m inclined to agree. Sean McGuire of Reuters hints that increas­ing leaks of out­side real­ity into North Korea could under­mine the cred­i­bil­ity of Kim’s stri­dent anti-U.S. rhetoric among his own peo­ple, weak­en­ing his power. To dra­mat­i­cally innoc­u­late the pop­u­lace against such “exter­nal dis­in­for­ma­tion” would give Kim ample motive to have set up Kang Nam 1 as bait in an elab­o­rate pro­pa­ganda trap.

If Kang Nam 1 needs and wants to refuel in Singapore or Hong Kong or wher­ever, and her cargo upon an inspec­tion turns out to be harm­less, Kim Jong Il has fur­ther “proof,” for domes­tic con­sump­tion, of American per­se­cu­tion against the DPRK and its inter­ests. Main ele­ments of the USS Ronald Reagan car­rier bat­tle group docked last week in Singapore for leave and local vol­un­teerism. What might appear as a not-​​coincidental show of American strength to Pyongyang, were Kang Nam 1 to try to sail right by through the Strait of Malacca with­out stop­ping, could be turned around by Kim into fur­ther proof of alleged American evil intent, thus doing more than merely sal­vaging face when his ship turned around. Pyongyang could cast their mer­chie as the intre­pid under­dog in a long-​​distance stand-​​off with the big, bad superpower’s super­car­rier, giv­ing ship and crew a hero’s wel­come back home. If Kang Nam 1 some­how does make it to Myanmar — assum­ing that’s ever been her intended des­ti­na­tion — with­out trig­ger­ing a UN third-​​party in-​​harbor inspec­tion some­where, Kim can whip up patri­otic fer­vor about the tech­ni­cal inge­nu­ity and self-​​sacrificing per­se­ver­ance of his valiant mer­chant marine.

In extremis, say if an attempt to board by force to inspect on the high seas were made, the crew can scut­tle Kang Nam 1 in deep water and take to their lifeboats. They could even set explo­sive charges on short timers before they aban­don her. Ambiguity as to the real nature of her cargo would thus be pre­served, and ambi­gu­ity would work entirely to Kim Jong Il’s advantage.

– Joe Buff

Share |

July 2nd, 2009 | Those Nutty Norks | 455738 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2009/07/02/kang-nam-1-mystery-trip/Kang+Nam+1+Mystery+Trip2009-07-02+11%3A28%3A25Ward You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Iraq: Que Sera Sera | The Forgotten War » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. joe buff says:
    July 2, 2009 at 8:23 am

    UPDATE 9:30am EST 2 July: On Wednesday a Myanmar offi­cial said that Kang Nam 1 would not be wel­come if it was car­ry­ing arms. This just adds to the puz­zle. The ship turned back north on Sunday. Had Pyongyang already heard this from Myanmar on Sunday? Or did Myanmar only make the state­ment know­ing that the ship had already turned around? Did the U.S., which is try­ing to improve rela­tions with Myanmar, pre­vail on them to issue the state­ment as a quid pro quo for more aid? Or was Kang Nam 1 never bound for Myanmar in the first place?

    Reply
  2. PolicyWonk says:
    July 2, 2009 at 10:18 am

    It could also be an indi­ca­tion that N. Korea has sim­ply gone too far. If Myanmar refuses to wel­come the ship if it is car­ry­ing ille­gal cargo, then per­haps it was made clear (even to Kim Jong Il) that maybe they pushed the game fur­ther than they should.
    Of course by now, it would’ve been bet­ter if the McCain were relieved by another UN nations ship. That way it doesn’t look like it is only the US doign all the dirty work.

    Reply
  3. subnuc says:
    July 2, 2009 at 11:06 am

    I think the ship was probaly headed to Mynammar (screw it I’m call­ing it Burma) with arms and the NKs decided to turn back before they were boarded by a U.N naval vessal

    Reply
  4. John Moore says:
    July 2, 2009 at 12:13 pm

    Are you kid­ding me peo­ple don’t you read his­tory?
    Myanmar is not going to side with the U.N if the ship was going there it would be wel­come.
    This is sim­ply a case of embarase the U.S.A. Big multi bil­lion dol­lar war ship sent to fol­low a ship that they can’t even tounch FRIG FRIG FRIG.
    The UN sux!

    Reply
  5. subnuc says:
    July 2, 2009 at 2:12 pm

    Right, the whole peace­keep­ing, nuclear dis­arm­ing, feed­ing starv­ing peo­ple in Africa, etc. its all just a hor­ri­ble idea, The U.N isn’t great but does well with the resources it has

    Reply
  6. John moore says:
    July 2, 2009 at 3:15 pm

    nuclear dis­arm­ing, can you please name one coun­try that had nukes and was dis­armed please?

    Reply
  7. subnuc says:
    July 2, 2009 at 3:55 pm

    Well I mean the try, and yeah It’ll never work but still.….give them some credit. They take care of alot more issues then what peo­ple realize.

    Reply
  8. subnuc says:
    July 2, 2009 at 3:55 pm

    Well I mean they try, and yeah It’ll never work but still.….give them some credit. They take care of alot more issues then what peo­ple realize.

    Reply
  9. JT says:
    July 2, 2009 at 4:09 pm

    “nuclear dis­arm­ing, can you please name one coun­try that had nukes and was dis­armed please?“
    South Africa had six weapons and vol­un­tar­ily dis­armed in the 1991.

    Reply
  10. joe buff says:
    July 2, 2009 at 4:43 pm

    JT et​.al.: Back in the late ‘90s I read some things sug­gest­ing that South Africa’s giv­ing up their small nuclear weapons arse­nal (maybe 6 nukes) was really mostly about the white in-​​power regime there see­ing that the awful apartheid sys­tem would col­lapse soon, and the racist gov­ern­ment didn’t want there to be a “Black African A-​​Bomb.” So they wiped out their pro­gram, and then in ’94 apartheid did fall.
    BTW I saw on a blog called “Hot Air” that one com­men­ta­tor thinks the Kang Nam 1 turned around because, to para­phrase him, Kim blinked and Obama deserves credit for mak­ing him blink. Personally I don’t think this is an accu­rate take.
    Also the Christian Science Monitor says that the ship turned around on Tuesday, but what I have seen is that the USN announced on Tuesday that the ship turned around on Sunday.

    Reply
  11. subnuc says:
    July 2, 2009 at 5:13 pm

    Well North Korea doesn’t send mer­chant ships out on their “Great Leader’s” orders right?
    Might’ve been a WMD they were try­ing to get to some ter­ror group, and it turned around because we got onto them.

    Reply
  12. Exnuc says:
    July 2, 2009 at 5:42 pm

    Subnuc,
    Other than a half way decent Christmas stamp the UN pro­duced 15 years ago, just what is that you feel they do decently? I could write all day about their fail­ures, their fail­ures to act, and their cor­rup­tion. Do you remem­ber the Oil-​​for-​​food scan­dal? When did they move to stop the racial killings in Dafur? And in what region of the world have they ever suc­cess­fully keep the peace? And when was the last time the UN actu­ally enforced one of their threats? That is only the tip of a very nasty ice­berg! So please tell me, sir, why you seem to be enam­bered with the UN.

    Reply
  13. Bambooviper says:
    July 2, 2009 at 6:34 pm

    If we do any­thing to stop Kang Nam 1, we will still look like a bully. They are not stu­pid enough to have any­thing of con­to­band on it. Just a game of cat and mouse. I would just just say to heck with it and leave it alone, you never play another man’s game​.BV

    Reply
  14. Dave Barnes says:
    July 2, 2009 at 10:19 pm

    Torpedo.
    Next prob­lem.
    Blame the sink­ing on the ChiComs.

    Reply
  15. Charles says:
    July 3, 2009 at 7:12 am

    Of course, if we sent in frog­men to sink the boat when it enters a port or shal­low water, then we can sal­vage in inter­na­tional waters.
    If it can be sunk in a region shal­low enough to be accessed by divers, we sink the boat with frog­men, then inspect it via diver. Then if there was noth­ing we leave the boat to the North Koreans for pos­si­ble sal­vage. If we find some­thing, raise the boat and dis­play the cargo.

    Reply
  16. freefallingbomb says:
    July 3, 2009 at 9:42 am

    Hey guys, are you ready for Kim Jong-il’s live nuclear mis­sile test against Hawaii tomor­row, on this glo­ri­ous 4th of July of 2009 ?? This could very well be THE END of the U.S.A. = the sec­ond hap­pi­est day in our lives (after the anni­hi­la­tion of Jew-​​land) !
    Clear the deck of Kang Nam 1… erect silo… open hatch… light the fuse… fuse is burn­ing… 13… 12… 10… 9… 6… 4… 2… 1… 0 ! Brilliant Comrade Kim Jong-​​il, we have a lift-​​off… all flight para­me­ters nor­mal… sep­a­rate first stage… orbit steady… Pyongyang, we have no prob­lem… ini­ti­ate re-​​entry… Pearl Harbour in sight… how peace­ful it looks… change course: New tar­get is Washington… release mul­ti­ple war­heads… now!
    Just trolling.

    Reply
  17. Jim says:
    July 3, 2009 at 10:48 am

    Ok, I will ask the ques­tion. How can North Korea declare war against the US or South Korea if they are tech­ni­cally still in a state of war? Why don’t we call their bluff and board the ship and be done with it. If “the Troll” wants more war give it to him. After every­thing is said and done, there will be lit­tle left of NK to “sweep up and place into the dust bin of his­tory”. I would not even bother with Nuclear weapons, just just a few “daisy cut­ters” and sev­eral of the MOABs stored around the US. That should def­i­nitely get “the Troll’s” atten­tion and maybe, also a few of his idiot generals.

    Reply
  18. pa-pa says:
    July 3, 2009 at 10:53 am

    Ex-​​Navy Missile Technician
    Always amazes me how stu­pid our pop­u­la­tion really is. What do you peo­ple really know? Nothing–
    Missiles, or Nuclear Weapons– you know noth­ing!!
    You can believe that the Kang Nam 1 crew is very scared– the USS John McCain on the hori­zon…
    Dumb-​​asses like “freefalling­bomb,” come on please, “light the fuse??”

    Reply
  19. Roy Smith says:
    July 3, 2009 at 12:10 pm

    “THE SCRIPT HAS NOW BEEN WRITTEN— A hair-​​raising con­fronta­tion in Korea may, towards the end of the period, threaten man’s very sur­vival.” [Peter Lemesurier, “The Armageddon Script”, p. 223]

    Reply
  20. FERjuilan says:
    July 3, 2009 at 2:51 pm

    The ship is full of coun­ter­fit US cur­rency and print­ing presses that is sold on the black mar­ket all over the world. It comes back home with drugs and liquor for the crack heads in north korea. This sce­nario would be more real world than all the other suppositions.…..

    Reply
  21. Anthony says:
    July 3, 2009 at 9:28 pm

    Its sad that tomor­row is the 4th of July, and the United States is being pushed around by coun­tries like North Korea and Iran. What hap­pened to that Axis of Evil? does any­one remem­ber what hap­pened in September 2001? How long are we going to stand by and let the girlscout’s — i mean the UN — deal out bogus sanc­tions and sit back and do noth­ing. Maybe this ship has noth­ing on it. Maybe it has a small nuclear weapon on it headed for down­town LA. How scared is our coun­try that we can’t even board a ship owned by a coun­try that has a mil­i­tary the Massachusetts Air National Guard would wipe off the map before dawn.? September 11th was a sec­ond pearl har­bor, but our resolve has been weak and has only shown our ene­mies that we are no longer the Home of the Brave. There has to be other Americans like me who are just wait­ing for a twig to snap before we finally put our col­lec­tive foot down and tell these clowns that Enough is Enough!
    Letting this boat get away is dis­gust­ing and and embar­rass­ment to what our nation is founded upon. This after­noon i was in Boston look­ing at the statue of General Washington on his horse, and I’m cer­tain if he could he would have parked an air­craft car­rier in front of this thug­boat, all the while wav­ing his proud mid­dle fin­ger at the rest of the inter­na­tional “com­mu­nity” — because his job is to pro­tect the People of the United States of America, not appease the girlscout cookie stand across the ocean.

    Reply
  22. flying fart proudly joned says:
    July 4, 2009 at 12:19 am

    North Korea fired three mis­siles into the sea between the Communist state and Japan on Saturday morn­ing, the South Korean mil­i­tary announced.
    i see a big midle fin­ger ris­ing from N-​​Korea..
    i see noone car­ing about.
    i see n-​​koreans vic­tory.
    i see amer­i­cans pro­ceed­ing to suck chi­nese dicks.
    make debts buy in walmarkt!

    Reply
  23. JW says:
    July 4, 2009 at 2:24 am

    @John moore
    “nuclear dis­arm­ing, can you please name one coun­try that had nukes and was dis­armed please?“
    South Africa & Brazil vol­un­tar­ily gave up nuclear weapons. Canada had the capac­ity, the mate­ri­als and the tech­nol­ogy, but decided to remain nuclear free.

    Reply
  24. Valcan says:
    July 4, 2009 at 9:22 am

    Bomb,
    gived = gave
    Sink the bas­terd if or if not just drop some seals onboard.

    Reply
  25. freefallingbomb says:
    July 5, 2009 at 2:35 am

    To the poster “Valcan”:
    You wrote (to “fly­ing fart proudly joned”) : “Bomb, gived = gave“
    If that com­ment was aimed at ME (because of “Bomb”) : Thanks, but I knew that. And: “fly­ing fart proudly joned” and I are really two dif­fer­ent per­sons /​ posters. I usu­ally troll with my orig­i­nal nick­name until the edi­tors of a F.U.B.A.R. Internet dis­cus­sion forum come after it.

    Reply
  26. flying fart proudly joned says:
    July 5, 2009 at 2:59 am

    @freefallingbomb
    arghhh… say tha trol! (we are even post­ing not from a same continent.)

    Reply
  27. pedestrian says:
    July 6, 2009 at 7:10 am

    I believe the des­ti­na­tion should have been Iran or Syria, while Myanmar was a fake.

    Reply
  28. Rhyno327 says:
    July 6, 2009 at 7:30 am

    Remember you US hat­ing c-​​nts, “he who laughs last laughs the hardest”…as I believe we will have the LAST laugh. Now go bother some­one else. J-​​offs.

    Reply
  29. shawn says:
    July 6, 2009 at 9:33 am

    Its a 3-​​part ploy:
    1) DECOY
    2) TEST (How far can the ship make it with­out refuel & will some­one vio­late the UN Resolution)
    3) Propaganda (big bad ‘States are pick­ing on us, we per­se­vered regard­less, etc.)
    If some­one searches with­out autho­riza­tion, then yes, they go “Oh, no ille­gal materiele here!” because there’s noth­ing on it, other than per­haps enough dead weight to add up to a real ille­gal load. This way a) they get searched and the searchee gets egg on their face, b) if some­one decides to destroy the ship out­wright, they don’t lose the materiele.

    Reply
  30. joe buff says:
    July 6, 2009 at 9:16 pm

    UPDATE Monday evening: AP reports that Kang Nam 1 has reen­tered North Korean ter­ri­to­r­ial waters. U.S. Navy CNO Admiral Gary Roughead has praised the sur­veil­lance effort which kept track of the ship and pre­vented any pos­si­bil­ity of her com­plet­ing any arms ship­ment barred by the UN.
    Did Kim blink, or was the sor­tie by Kang Nam 1 to him all along just about internal/​domestic DPRK pro­pa­ganda? Will he try again with a ship that has longer cruis­ing range, one that could reach Myanmar (or wher­ever) with­out refu­el­ing?
    Was the pos­si­ble launch­ing of an ICBM toward Hawaii for the 4th of July just a rumor, or a bluff?
    I think that for now at least, to the world out­side Kim’s realm, he looks like a bit of a paper tiger. (But he does still have those half-​​dozen nukes.) Whether or not he can turn this into some sort of pos­i­tive on the home front remains to be seen. If he does, the whole adven­ture could turn into a very strange win-​​win for all concerned.

    Reply
  31. shuman says:
    July 6, 2009 at 11:36 pm

    What would hap­pen if an old fish­ing net fouled the pro­pellers of the ship and they were adrift in inter­na­tional waters far from home???

    Reply
  32. loupgarous says:
    August 31, 2009 at 5:28 am

    I have to agree with you, Christian… this shouts “provo­ca­tion!” — the Norks send a pathetic rust­bucket which wouldn’t pass a sea­wor­thi­ness inspec­tion out on a jaunt, leaks the tid­bit that it’s car­ry­ing con­tra­band to Myanmar, and if ANYTHING unto­ward hap­pens onboard, Michael Moore will he able to go to Pyongyang and shoot a sym­pa­thetic movie about the whole thing later.
    We did very well to shadow that stink­ing barge and not touch it unless we had really good cause. If the UN wants its embar­goes enforced, let the Germans or the Australians do the job, so that there’s no ques­tion of US hege­mony in the WestPac.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

    Most Popular Posts
    • The Osprey has Landed
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Starship Troopers Meets G.I. Joe
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Adapting Women to Subs
    • Keep it Simple
    • What 60 Minutes Got Right (Thanks to Us)
    Recent Comments
    • BREAK-BREAK: Units to Get New Camo Revealed
      I ment to add in response to the news post: No, I...
      booms
    • BREAK-BREAK: Units to Get New Camo Revealed
      But Oble… winning will mean nothing when...
      booms
    • (Proof) The Osprey Has Landed
      Have you also had a Maserati? … I think what christian...
      Oble
    • The Osprey has Landed
      Hey FFB, Did you know that the can opener was designed after the metal...
      Ed!
    • BREAK-BREAK: Units to Get New Camo Revealed
      All these posts about fashion and nothing about...
      Oble
    • (Proof) The Osprey Has Landed
      I'm not sure you can relate. Have you also had a Maserati?
      Jim
    • Brazil’s Blackout Soot or Cyber?
      To the poster "Philo" : You wrote:...
      freefallingbomb
    • Brazil’s Blackout Soot or Cyber?
      “if you’re sourcing McConnell, you might as...
      Oble
    • The Osprey has Landed
      Part IV : But you don't even have a fast COIN plane to...
      freefallingbomb
    • The Osprey has Landed
      Part III : You wrote: "The Osprey would not make a good...
      freefallingbomb
    Recent Articles
    • (Proof) The Osprey Has Landed
    • BREAK-​​BREAK: Units to Get New Camo Revealed
    • Brazil’s Blackout Soot or Cyber?
    • Stitching a Stretchy Crotch
    • Classified Bids Submitted For UK UAV
    • Caught on Tape: JSF
    • The Osprey has Landed
    • What 60 Minutes Got Right (Thanks to Us)
    • Semi-​​auto Grenade Thrower
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage