...the rendezvous of satellite and kill warhead, the admiral said:

"When you bring them together ... you can get a lot more value."

Satellite + kill warhead = $$$ (or £££, or €€€...)

I think that "Sat-Smash Smithereens" would be a good name for a band.

Rear Admiral, huh huh heh huh heh :-) What the hell is a Rear Admiral anyway?

Alan Hicks - sounds like a complete di...

Think Paris knows about Rear Admirals?

Looks to me like the US has the capability to destroy spacecraft, even if it's low altitude. Oh, and by the way, how does it make more sense to break up toxic chemicals in the atmosphere vs. a restricted area on the ground? Seems to me this exercise risked spreading the satellite and it's cargo over an area of miles, not the two football fields expected by a direct impact.

Careful. Grace Hopper was a Rear Admiral...

A Rear Admiral is a junior Admiral, kept at the back of the fleet during an engagement effectively as a spare, in case the other Admirals get to visit Davy Jones.

Minor correction (or additon if you like).

In sailing-ship naval warfare, the admiral commanding the fleet would be onboard the lead ship in the engagement, with the fleet strung out in line behind him. As the two hostile fleets pass one another, they fire off their cannon, of course. When the two fleets have passed beyond engagement range, each individual ship comes about, reversing the order of the ships in line, and the rear admiral (formerly on the rearmost ship, which has now become the lead ship) commands the fleet during this pass.

So a Rear Admiral is the fleet's second-in-command when they're sailing "forward," and the fleet's battle commander when they're sailing back the other way.

Mine's the one with "pedant" emblazoned across the back...

Hasn't Disney taught you anything? It's clearly pronounced:

"Dehvy Joons"

Mines the Long ornate one with the hidden compartments for "booty"

Sean, you ask, "Oh, and by the way, how does it make more sense to break up toxic chemicals in the atmosphere vs. a restricted area on the ground?"

Breaking it up in a location you determine is preferred over letting it land where it may and cleaning it up. If the sat had come down in a populated area, it would have done so with little warning, and the hydrazine, contained in a tank that might have survived reentry, could have poisoned a significant number of people. Bursting it high up in the atmosphere allowed it to disperse to safe concentrations, or maybe even be broken down into its chemical components by unfiltered sunlight, before hitting the surface in a location of the US Gov's choosing, in this case, well out to sea.

Skull and bones for poisonous content. Or perhaps I should have gone with the black helo for US Gov conspiracy to put some fish at risk?

The military were surprised to find that the craft was pulverised? Am I the only one who can think of a more likely alternative?

On contact the fuel ignites and takes the said sat away at a rate of knots. Later, when no one is looking, it comes back to haunt us.

"The U.S. has just demonstrated that it can knock out anything in orbit from a ship fired weapon, at will".

Shoot the moon!..

Also, I significantly remember concerns about the first attempt due to bad weather from the launch site. So, yes, the U.S. can indeed knock out anything in orbit from a ship fired weapon, so long as it's a nice pleasant day, and it's smaller than the moon. Those evil spysats are fine so long as they get a helping hand from inclement weather conditions...