Cheyenne Mountain mothballed

[kato13]

shrike6 07-28-2006, 02:48 PM http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060728...y_060728175027

********************

pmulcahy 07-28-2006, 05:39 PM I saw that story today on MSNBC; the report on MSNBC showed one officer saying that "they didn't know what they were going to do with the Mountain."


And that really pisses me off. Not because having NORAD under a mountain is still necessary -- it isn't anymore. Not because it's a sterling example of modern technology -- it isn't really that anymore, either. What bothers me is that over the past 55 years or so, the US and Canada (and to a far lesser extent, some of the other NATO countries) have sunk unpteen hundreds of billions of dollars into Cheyenne Mountain. And it's just going to be mothballed. What an incredible waste!

********************

DeaconR 07-29-2006, 08:35 AM As one with Nineveh and Tyre.

********************

pmulcahy 07-29-2006, 08:42 AM Agreed; as I just posted on Antenna's T2K board, the Israelis were doing what they had to do for about the first 10 days or so -- but they've stepped over the line to an unnecessary level of violence now.

********************

firewalker 08-01-2006, 09:02 PM And it's just going to be mothballed. What an incredible waste!


well isn't that the way it's supposed to work. you got something, first it's state of the art, then you got to start putting $$ in it to keep it up (mantince, upgrades what have you). eventually you come up with something better, then you ether got to keep poring the billions in for diminishing returns or move over to the new. thay do say it's going to be maintained so it can be reactivated in an hour's notice (how long that will last is anybody's guss).


how do ya'll think that would change it's survivability in a twilight game? in the since that it would be believable that it wasn't hit or not hit sufficiently to destroys it?



by the by you this anucment made quite a splash on the sg-1 game boards.

********************