Consider the odds that the current tension has had a lot of people thinking they should test their emergency alert systems really soon, and we're hearing about each case where someone had a bad user-interface which they tried to compensate for with training rather than fixing it.
You are correct. There is no current reporting that claims these were set off intentionally. However, I'm curious if there could be a valid motive for both states to purposely set off these false alarms. It does seem like a pretty big coincidence that both states happen to get these false alarms in relatively short time frame. I have already seen conspiracy posts making claims about these alarms being purposely set off, but they never provide a motive. Just curious if anyone can think of a valid one.
- To allow authorities to listen for "chatter" from NK military deployed in Hawaii who might have been ready to carry out some action if an attack were launched, but who would not likely have been told when it would occur.
- To watch how NK responds internally to the idea that the US might be launching a counter-strike. Things like escape routes, comms, etc., could be observed via sigint.
- To create a "path" for the public to think about this kind of thing. It's been years since anyone in the US (public or media) has had to think about incoming missile attacks. The false alarm gives all the reporters an excuse to read up on the history, to issue warnings about lack of preparedness, etc. This means that in the event of an actual attack the information mechanisms will all work more smoothly. It's a dress rehearsal so that everyone is not stuck like a deer in the headlights if an attack occurs.
- The false alarm could have been triggered by someone on the payroll of NK. Note that the main goal of the military is to inspire fear, not to actually kill people.
When a nuke comes to destroy a big developed part of Hawai'i, there's a lot of stuff on the island you might want to get out of there. Maybe, systems are designed to rapidly move that stuff to safety, as soon as an alert triggers it. A Bulk Data Transfer of all sensitive, unique data would probably be hardcoded to start on this emergency alarm. How long would such a BDT take? Maybe somewhere around 38 minutes? Forget data transfers, what else might need to be moved out, that would take more than 30 minutes? This whole situation sounds silly, but what explanation sounds more probable?
I don't want to get into conspiracy type stuff, but I was saying to colleagues yesterday that the bright side of all this is that I imagine there are a lot of Hawaiians building their emergency survival kits right now.
I expect that we're seeing organizations dust off or setup new systems to warn their populations of incoming missiles as a result of the rising tensions with North Korea. There's an argument to be made that there could and are political motivations in addition to the concerns about safety.
In any case, as these systems are powered up, updated, overhauled or even replaced, there's testing going on. And when there's testing, there's the opportunity for just this type of gaffe.
