>>1748480

We're thinking along the same lines. Posted this on /research yesterday.

>>1758813

"Think hack."

I think the subs launch systems were compromised while under C/A control. I think that the sub was being redeployed with a new crew and something triggered the 6/12 launch: gps/timer/remote control.

>>1759469

You're right. I'll fix that for next time.

>>1759525

I don't know if there is a purely manual element to the launch. Makes sense that there are two parts, but if the onboard part can be compromised…

>>1759795

Agreed. And potentially difficult to detect short of ripping out the wiring of the entire sub.

Based on Q's drops, are we at a point where we can agree on the following with confidence:

The US was searching for a sub for a period of time at the end of last year. While in the Pacific, that sub launched a missile attack on HI on 1/13/18. This was expected. While in the Puget Sound, that sub launched a second missile on 6/10/18. This was unexpected.

>>1760258

I think the US is in control of the physical sub.

I think the subs systems are comped.