Category Archives: Brilliant Pebbles

June 23, 2015—Better Defenses: Part Way Back to the Future?

June 23, 2015—Better Defenses: Part Way Back to the Future?

America’s current missile defense strategy is “not sustainable,” according to Missile Defense Agency (MDA) Deputy Director USAF Brig. Gen. Kenneth Todorov. As reported by Sydney J. Freedberg in June 18’s Breaking Defense, he correctly emphasized that we can’t keep buying multi-million-dollar interceptors to shoot down adversaries’ ever-growing arsenals of much cheaper offensive missiles; we have to find a better way involving fewer Ground-Based Interceptors (GBIs) and more investment in R&D. Read Full Story

December 4, 2014—Time to Debate About Space Based Defense?

December 4, 2014—Time to Debate About Space Based Defense?

A recent National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) publication raised a timely issue—that it is time to debate the utility of space based defenses against ballistic missiles, because of the growing threat. I could not agree more, and here provide additional reasons why and offer some counters to those who criticized aspects of this important paper. Read Full Story

July 23, 2013—Time for Churchill’s “V for Victory”?

July 23, 2013—Time for Churchill’s “V for Victory”?

Winston Churchill overcame many difficulties—even failures—to speak truth to power in the 1930s, warning about the growing existential threat to Great Britain—indeed all of Western Civilization; and when that truth became sufficiently apparent, to lead the British from apathy to victory in a great world war. His “V for Victory” pose, illustrated above, rallied the people long before victory was sure. A review of some of that history could help us assess our efforts to awaken the powers that be to today’s electromagnetic pulse (EMP) threat and how to counter it—hopefully in time. Read Full Story

July 16, 2013—Time for Action to Counter EMP!

July 16, 2013—Time for Action to Counter EMP!

An existential electromagnetic pulse (EMP) threat is posed by a natural event (a massive solar emission that is infrequent but certain to occur—the only question is when) or a manmade event produced by a high altitude nuclear explosion that could be executed by a number of nation states or even terrorists. Recent events suggest a growing appreciation of the seriousness of these threats and possibly the initiation of helpful countermeasures. But will they be in time? Read Full Story

July 8, 2013—Go Navy . . . Be All You Can Be!

July 8, 2013—Go Navy . . . Be All You Can Be!

Given last Friday’s Ground Based Interceptor test failure and while that system is being improved, it is now even more important to assure that the Navy’s Aegis BMD system is made fully capable to defend the American homeland against long range intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) attack. It can rapidly provide a relatively inexpensive back-up capability—and with relatively inexpensive improvements can become a major adjunct defense of Americans at home as well as our overseas troops, friends and allies. Read Full Story

July 5, 2013—The Most Cost-Effective Defense: Space Based Interceptors!

July 5, 2013—The Most Cost-Effective Defense: Space Based Interceptors!

Space based interceptors are potentially the most cost-effective way to defend against ballistic missiles of all ranges more than a few hundred miles—and over twenty years ago the technology was sufficiently mature to build such a system within five years of a decision to do so. But the pathway to such cost-effective defenses is blocked by ideological concerns that masquerade behind phony arguments, such as about costs—and contrary to findings 20 years ago that have been forgotten, after the key programs were canceled in 1993. How can we go back to the future? Read Full Story

June 28, 2013— Some Good News in S.1197

June 28, 2013— Some Good News in S.1197

There is a good news from Capitol Hill to add to Last Friday’s message of hope that the 113th Congress will take up legislation to protect the electric power grid—without which the electromagnetic pulse from a natural or manmade event could lead to the death of several hundred million Americans. The SASC version of the National Defense Authorization Act provides hope that two major High Frontier concerns will be addressed in a Defense Department study that will consider how best to counter ballistic missiles launched from vessels off our coasts and nuclear-armed satellites that approach the U.S. from over the South Pole. Stay tuned for the rest of the debate! Read Full Story

June 18, 2013— Hasan Rowhani: Hope for the best; Prepare for the worst . . .

June 18, 2013— Hasan Rowhani: Hope for the best; Prepare for the worst . . .

Iran has a new President, but the supreme leader and his policies remain in place. These policies call for destroying the “little Satan” Israel and the “great Satan” America. Expect a softer diplomatic approach from Hassan Rouhani than Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s bombastic pronouncements, but no different bottom lines. We should be hard-nosed diplomatically while standing with Israel and building our defenses against the growing possibility of a nuclear armed Iran. Read Full Story

June 10, 2013—Can You See What’s Falling Through the Cracks?

June 10, 2013—Can You See What’s Falling Through the Cracks?

The 1998 Commission to Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat warned that sea-launched short range ballistic missiles are a shortcut to attacking the United States. Defenses have been developed to protect the U.S. against Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs), but nothing has been, or is being, done to defend against this sea-launched threat to the U.S.—nor to defend against a plausible attack from over the South Pole. Our vulnerability to such plausible attacks from North Korea and/or Iran can be addressed, but there appears to be no plan to do so. This should change! Read Full Story

June 4, 2013—Tilting to Northeast Asia

June 4, 2013—Tilting to Northeast Asia

On the 24th anniversary of Tiananmen Square and the eve of President Obama’s meeting with China’s President Xi Jiaping, it is important that the “powers that be” realize that military-to-military exchanges with China are no substitute for underwriting a needed “Peace through Strength” policy in Northeast Asia with serious defense programs second to none. Read Full Story