Thread Rating:
  • 3 Vote(s) - 3.67 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
MK controversy thread
(05-26-2024, 06:20 AM)kalianna Wrote: Thatʻs correct.  They track satellites not missiles.  I stand corrected.  And yes, Honolulu would be first but a site like this would still be of military importance and increases Mauiʻs likelihood of being attacked.

I don't understand your logic. Pearl Harbor would certainly be a first-strike target, but why would Haleakala be attacked? What would be the point after destroying Pearl Harbor and Honolulu? Mana Kea observatories also observe satellites. Does that make them targets as well? I can understand Hilo being a target due to having a deep-water harbor, but if that happened, the observatories on Mauna Kea would be useless anyway. But it's an irrelevant point.
Reply
(05-26-2024, 06:11 AM)TomK Wrote:  There's no reason to attack a bunch of telescopes.

Tell that to The Protectors.
Reply
There's no reason to attack a bunch of telescopes.

There are facilities that specifically track missiles.  Early warning sites in Alaska and Canada.  NORAD, Cheyenne Mountain.  There are missile silos that contain nukes.  Military bases with offensive and defensive weapons.  These are all more likely targets than observatories.  

Kahului Airport is probably a more likely target than Haleakala, as a means to isolate the island if nothing else. But I don’t see Protectors lining up to shut down the terminal and runways because it might be a target if a foreign military attacks.  How else would Protectors get to Hilo to protest the TMT, and claim that because it uses adaptive optics and lasers it’s somehow a military base? So hundreds of people can camp on Mauna Kea and point fingers at a handful of observatory technicians for polluting the water table.  
Reply
I don't think overlooking Pohakuloa as a target is wise..
Reply
don't think overlooking Pohakuloa as a target is wise..

Good point.
I saw 3 people, 1 holding a sign at the gate the last time I drove by.
So instead of setting up camp to point out the danger of hundreds? thousands? of pounds of depleted uranium purposely shot all over the aina, why do they protest a few ounces of antifreeze accidentally spilled at an observatory?
Reply
(05-26-2024, 09:20 PM)HereOnThePrimalEdge Wrote: why do they protest a few ounces of antifreeze accidentally spilled at an observatory?

I don't know, what didn't you stop and ask them?
Reply
I don't know, what didn't you stop and ask them?

Because I would have to ask whether they realized their camp made more pollution in a few days than the observatories did in years.  And could point out examples of trash just a few feet away in any direction.  Their response would most likely not be logical, provable, or correct, but there would be a lot more of them so definitely louder.

Remember, after camp broke up the County had to send 30 workers and multiple garbage trucks to clean up the mess.  It’s on video, County workers, County trucks, but the protesters said on social media they themselves returned the intersection to its pristine state.
Reply
(05-26-2024, 08:33 PM)MyManao Wrote: I don't think overlooking Pohakuloa as a target is wise..

I think my previous point still stands. Pohakuloa is not an importantl target. There's very little there; it's a training area, and even if it were attacked, what difference would it make? It's hardly vital infrastructure. All such an attack would do is invite a retaliatory strike by the US, including the powerful navy and air force based on Oahu. For example, why do you think Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in WWII?
Reply
The Hawaii Supreme Court just issued this ruling:

On Thursday, in its 47-page opinion written by Justice Sabrina McKenna, the Hawaiʻi Supreme Court held:

Act 14 of 1995 does not preclude Plaintiffs’ claims;
the portion of the MKAR going through DHHL lands is not a state highway because legal requirements for such a designation were not satisfied; and
the State blatantly disregarded unambiguous requirements of the “Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920” (“HHCA”), and in doing so, breached its constitutional and fiduciary obligation to faithfully carry out the HHCA. Haw. Const. art. XII, § 2; Ahuna v. Dep’t of Hawaiian Home Lands, 64 Haw. 327, 338, 640 P.2d 1161, 1168 (1982).

Full article here: 
https://www.bigislandvideonews.com/2024/...cess-road/
Reply
I'm not sure this is relevant. The TMT is a done deal as far as I'm concerned; it won't be built here.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)