[DeepSpace9er]

The Freespace Universe is sooner than your think.... either that or C&C

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/18/business/18space.html?ei=5065&en=60787fcf0b0f012c&ex=1116993600&adxnnl=1&partner=MYWAY&adxnnlx=1116389179-cuLSydFa9CCBN0MvzsfilA&pagewanted=print

[Mefustae]

Bloody Hell, the mere THOUGHT of Space Based weapons in the world of today just reeks of the everpresent Over-Confident, Selfish, and Hypocritical American Government. C'mon, the UN CharterProhibits orbital weaponry, so what do the Americans do, they go on and build orbital weaponry. Sure, it's only intelligence and data disruption at the moment, but i give it 20 years before a project is launched (forgive the pun) to get Nuclear Weapons Launch Platforms into orbit.

General Cartwright said that the military would "provide every opportunity to ensure that it's not misunderstood" and that Global Strike simply aimed to "expand the choices that we might be able to offer to the president in crisis."

Ha! Indeed, how someone could ever think that a project named 'Global Strike' would be an offensive weapon is completely beyond me...Hell, looks like the current US Administration is just looking for another damn way to make sure that if they can't rule the world, no-bloody-one else can...

[Descenterace]

Putting mirrors in space to reflect ground-based lasers over the horizon is also a violation of a treaty; the same one that forbids antimissile lasers to be stationed in space.

Airborne and ground-based lasers are not a violation, but as soon as a space vehicle is used to reflect the beam to hit over-the-horizon targets, they become a violation.

I'm not entirely against the idea of putting weapons in space (at least, no more than I am against the idea of weapons, period). It's frequently the military that pushes technology forward in this respect. The first step is developing the military uses of a new technology. The second step is developing the civilian uses by extending the military uses.

Nuclear energy is a case in point. Admittedly, it was first developed for civilian use, but it was first used as a weapon and with the development of more powerful weapons came a better understanding of the forces we were dealing with.
We haven't had a major nuclear war yet. Who's to say we'll ever have a war in space?

Wars are usually fought with consideration of the economy. The Cold War was won because the US managed to outspend the USSR. I doubt that orbital weapons are more economical than standard weapons. They will only be used when the balance tips and space technologies become advanced enough to make them economical.

Although, it has to be said that the US can probably afford to waste money on using uneconomical weaponry...

[aldo_14]

[q]Another Air Force space program, nicknamed Rods From God, aims to hurl cylinders of tungsten, titanium or uranium from the edge of space to destroy targets on the ground, striking at speeds of about 7,200 miles an hour with the force of a small nuclear weapon.[/q]


This is ****ing ridiculous - they seem to be hell-bent on starting their own apocalypse now....  I don't think there's a single nation on earth that'd accept this; it'd be guarenteeing the US complete global dominance.

I have to keep checking this isn't an April fools; when I wrote ridiculous, I meant it......

[DeepSpace9er]

Accept it or not, you've got to admit the prospect of something like that is just awesome. The name just fits it perfectly. But since US goverment sources couldnt be trusted to hold a gallon of water without leaking, the world knows about it years ahead of time. Who is to say that Russia or somebody else doesnt have a weapons platform of some degree in space already? Get ready for the ASAT technology to go big.

[Andreas]

Originally posted by Descenterace
We haven't had a major nuclear war yet. Who's to say we'll ever have a war in space?

Just because we haven't yet annihilated ourselves using nukes (which is a relatively short period of 60 years...) doesn't mean we won't never ever do so. Same goes for space.

It is interesting to notice that even with the growing budget deficit (sp?) in the US, they still seem to have enough money to divert to producing weapons that never should have even existed in the first place. So, now we can launch nukes from orbiting satellites. What's next? Launching them from the Moon?

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
Accept it or not, you've got to admit the prospect of something like that is just awesome. The name just fits it perfectly. But since US goverment sources couldnt be trusted to hold a gallon of water without leaking, the world knows about it years ahead of time. Who is to say that Russia or somebody else doesnt have a weapons platform of some degree in space already? Get ready for the ASAT technology to go big.

'Awesome'?  I hardly find the idea of another nation having the uncontested ability to wipe out entire cities at will as being 'awesome'.  Terrifying, more likely.

At least in the Cold War the 2 sides knew they couldn't start a nuclear war without themselves being destroyed....

[Turnsky]

uh.. guys.. since when has the US actually obeyed the UN in recent history?

not forgetting that the US also did pull out from the antiballistic missle treaty...

and let us not forget, that it was -bound- to happen..

[Black Wolf]

Originally posted by Descenterace
Although, it has to be said that the US can probably afford to waste money on using uneconomical weaponry...

That's just the thing - they can't. If the American government was a company, they'd've been bankrupt  or in forced sales to pay off debts. They can't afford health care, but they can afford space guns? Please.

[aldo_14]

It's a shame the world doesn't have balliffs, sometimes........

[Styxx]

Hm, if that happens, say goodbye to satellite communications, 'cause it won't be long until someone like, say, China, decides it's better to deny orbital space to everyone than let the US place weapons up there, and launch a few scatter bombs. Then the fun is over.

[Unknown Target]

I don't really care. Think of it: we can already bomb Japan with weapons launched from New York. This is just moving the same capability higher.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Unknown Target
I don't really care. Think of it: we can already bomb Japan with weapons launched from New York. This is just moving the same capability higher.

Not exactly; firstly, it's attempting to circumvent the MAD state that prevents nuclear war - might be good for the US, but it's a disturbing prospect for the rest of the world.  If an effective global attack network was created, it'd mean there would be no equivalent response to a US attack.

Ultimately, the system invisaged would give the US the ability to lay waste to the entire world, with less risk and time than a conventional nuclear strike.  It would also likely use methods that made it more amenable to use; nuclear weapons have a tactical disadvantage of radiation that negates their use as a weapon for taking territory, or indeed anything beyond genocidal destruction.

 Secondly, it (potentially) means that space exploration will be subject to the military consent of the USAF, rather than a desire for peaceful exploration.

[castor]

Yeah, rather invest $1 trillion to doomsday weapons than even consider putting it into some sort of anti-war efforts.
Sure, big explosions are k00l, but that is plain madness.

[DeepSpace9er]

War is inevitable. History has proven that again and again. Its just how prepared you are when you goto war that matters. The Us would never lay waste to the world... otherwise whats the point. Like every other country in a global economy, the US is in a large way held up by the house of cards that the other countries in the world represent. Well maybe not that fragile but you get the point.

[Flipside]

War is only inevitable as long as mankind allows it to be so.

Nulcear reactions in the Sun are inevitable, clouds in the sky are inevitable, War is manufactured by humanity, and we could give it up any time we choose, but the gains are far quicker if we encourage it. No-one wants to do anything that will help, for example, 5 generations down the line, simply because they won't be there to enjoy it. The same applies here.

[DeepSpace9er]

You put it in such simple terms like 'mankind allows it to be so.' Mankind as a whole giving up conflict is utopian and impossible. THere will alwasy be fighting whether it be over ideology, land, wealth, power, etc. The heart and soul of man is filled with greed, selfishness, and lust for wealth and power. Just turning off these downward inclinations to war is totally impossible in our world. I dont care how many anti-war rallies are staged war will go on, and its how prepared you are for it when it comes.

Take the Romans for instance. They survived until they lost the will to fight, got fat, corrupt, and lazy, and they were conquered by barbarians. They werent prepared for war, the enemy was.. the US is at a crossroads to be ready to defend itself and possess technological superiority, or to give in and be 'equal' with the nations that would like nothing better than to erase the words "United States" from history.

[Unknown Target]

The US won't destroy the world, and it's pure stupidity to think that they would do so. Ok, circumvating the fact that if the world was blown up, it would destroy the US's enviroment and probably suffocate us all with a massive dust cloud or solar radiation or whatever, the US is a foreign-dependant economy. If we blow the hell out of everyone - guess what? We're not gonna have much of an economy left, or food, for that matter.


And I doubt that the USAF would start blasting other people out of the sky if they started launching, cause guess what? Other countries would go bonkers. A) They might attack the US on the ground, or B) They might start shooting down or jamming US satellites. Have you ever heard of that F-15 that shot a satellite out of space with a missile? Imagine that X20, all aiming for strategic military satellites, such as this and GPS. For those of you who are going to say "then they wouldn't be able to use GPS themselves" - the ESA is already planning a new GPS system to be launched.

[Flipside]

Actually, the simple answer is the right one. To simply turn around and say 'mankind will always be greedy and make war' is basically saying you have no trust either in your own nation or the rest of mankind to wage peace.

Considering that power and wealth are also human concepts, you are still talking about choices, you may not be able to give up your power and wealth, that is why generations in the future will suffer for it, but what you are basically implying is 'Everyone is as greedy as us, so we better get the first kick in'. Has it ever occured to you that this may not be the case, that by measuring everyone against the rod of insecurity that you seem to hold about the rest of the worlds opinions of your country, you are serving only to multiply your paranoia? Most of the world doesn't hate the US, I certainly don't, most of them just with you'd stop trying to build weapons that can kill millions of people, because lives are worth something.

It's a self-generating situation. We could stop war, but by jumping to the conclusion of 'Let's get them coz they wanna get us!', we serve only to propogate it.

Remember, Wealth and Power are as much a human-created thing as war is, just because the Romans did it 2000 years ago, doesn't pass as an excuse for humanity not to grow up.

[Andreas]

Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
the US is at a crossroads to be ready to defend itself and possess technological superiority, or to give in and be 'equal' with the nations that would like nothing better than to erase the words "United States" from history.

Defend itself with nukes from whom? Terrorists? And who exactly would want to wipeout US? North Korea? IMO there is nothing wrong with maintaining an army, to protect your country from a foreign invader (in theory). But does the US really have that sort of enemy that would require it to have a orbital satellite capable of launching nukes or being able to fire a laser? I think not. It's plain and simple overkill, not to mention insane waste of money.