|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
New presidential directive calls for U.S. to deploy weapons in space
[sci.astro removed from newsgroups]
In article . com, MrPepper11 wrote: They think that "the United States doesn't own space - nobody owns space," said Teresa Hitchens, vice president of the Center for Defense Information ... "Space is a global commons under international treaty and international law." So are the oceans, but few people protest the existence of the US Navy. Folks taking this line need to explain why they think space is different. -- "Think outside the box -- the box isn't our friend." | Henry Spencer -- George Herbert | |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
In sci.space.policy Henry Spencer wrote:
[sci.astro removed from newsgroups] In article . com, MrPepper11 wrote: They think that "the United States doesn't own space - nobody owns space," said Teresa Hitchens, vice president of the Center for Defense Information ... "Space is a global commons under international treaty and international law." So are the oceans, but few people protest the existence of the US Navy. Folks taking this line need to explain why they think space is different. Firstly, teh oceans are not really like the space. Secondly, there is no "economic zone" in space and thirdly, US is not going to nearly the same extents to deny others access to the oceans, unlike the space. -- Sander +++ Out of cheese error +++ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Firstly, teh oceans are not really like the space. Secondly, there is no "economic zone" in space and thirdly, US is not going to nearly the same extents to deny others access to the oceans, unlike the space. For a place that the US is supposedly "going to extremes to deny others access to," there sure is a lot of non-US activity there. But don't let us interrupt your fantasies, Sander. Yeah to that. The ESA has incredibly cheap launch rates. For 20 million, a damn civilian can fly into space. Adding the new private companies, and you can see space really is a lot like the sea. Its vast, open, and full of mystery. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Sander Vesik wrote:
So are the oceans, but few people protest the existence of the US Navy. Folks taking this line need to explain why they think space is different. Firstly, teh oceans are not really like the space. I see. Space is different because it is 'not really like' the oceans. What a wonderfully convincing argument. Paul |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 18 May 2005 21:09:09 +0000 (UTC), in a place far, far away,
Sander Vesik made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: In article . com, MrPepper11 wrote: They think that "the United States doesn't own space - nobody owns space," said Teresa Hitchens, vice president of the Center for Defense Information ... "Space is a global commons under international treaty and international law." So are the oceans, but few people protest the existence of the US Navy. Folks taking this line need to explain why they think space is different. Firstly, teh oceans are not really like the space. Secondly, there is no "economic zone" in space and thirdly, US is not going to nearly the same extents to deny others access to the oceans, unlike the space. For a place that the US is supposedly "going to extremes to deny others access to," there sure is a lot of non-US activity there. But don't let us interrupt your fantasies, Sander. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Sander Vesik wrote: So are the oceans, but few people protest the existence of the US Navy. Folks taking this line need to explain why they think space is different. Firstly, teh oceans are not really like the space. Why? ...and thirdly, US is not going to nearly the same extents to deny others access to the oceans, unlike the space. The purpose of attack submarines is to deny others access to the oceans (by sinking ships and other submarines). Compute how much the US attack-sub fleet has cost. Compare it to the budget for the "space control" efforts. You will find the comparison instructive. Hint: the first number has noticeably more digits than the second. There are more than a few surface ships with similar functions too. Not to mention aircraft and missile systems. Plus a whole bunch of support functions, e.g. the SOSUS sonar network and an assortment of satellites. All devoted to denying others access to the oceans, when required. Of course, there's also that unpleasant-sounding part about attacking ground targets from space. Now, if you thought the attack-sub fleet was expensive, try pricing ballistic-missile subs, whose job is to attack ground targets from the ocean. When you've gotten past your sticker shock on them, try pricing supercarriers and their attack aircraft. -- "Think outside the box -- the box isn't our friend." | Henry Spencer -- George Herbert | |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Henry Spencer wrote:
[sci.astro removed from newsgroups] In article . com, MrPepper11 wrote: They think that "the United States doesn't own space - nobody owns space," said Teresa Hitchens, vice president of the Center for Defense Information ... "Space is a global commons under international treaty and international law." So are the oceans, but few people protest the existence of the US Navy. But some people do protest the existence of such a redundantly large and useless navy. Folks taking this line need to explain why they think space is different. It's not necessary and - at best - will start an arms race in space? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
steve wrote:
will start an arms race in space? We can only hope. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
(Henry Spencer) wrote:
MrPepper11 wrote: They think that "the United States doesn't own space - nobody owns space," said Teresa Hitchens, vice president of the Center for Defense Information ... "Space is a global commons under international treaty and international law." So are the oceans, but few people protest the existence of the US Navy. Well - countries can and do protest the presence of the U.S. Navy near or in their waters - "In March 1996, the United States sent a task fleet composing of two aircraft carriers towards areas close to the Taiwan Straits...The Chinese Government made solemn representations and struggled resolutely against the United States for its above wrong doings." (http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/wjb/zzjg...441/t17320.htm) Few people protest the U.S. Navy if the ships are sailing out in deep ocean, but if a U.S. carrier task group sailed uninvited into the Murmansk seaport or the Bohai Sea, I'm sure that there would be a great deal of diplomatic screaming - and hopefully not worse. So yes, people do protest the US Navy - depending on where it's sailing. Folks taking this line need to explain why they think space is different. Placing weapons in deep space is one thing, but placing them in near earth orbit should be another matter. Putting conventional weapons in orbit might be considered analogous to, say, having the Russian fleet sailing its ships a half mile off the east coast and into the mouth of the Potomac. That's too damn close for anyone's comfort, even neglecting the issue of territorial waters. The fear of enemy weapons close at hand (in Turkey and Cuba) yielding insufficient response time was probably what nearly precipitated WWIII during the Cuban Missile crises. For these reasons I think it exceedingly unwise to deploy even conventional weapons in orbit, since the very characteristic that makes them appealing to the military is the same characteristic the makes them outrageous provocations to everyone they orbit over. I don't consider warships a few hundred miles off a coast to be in the equivalent strike position of war-satellites orbiting a few hundred miles up, and I don't expect anyone else will either, if or when such things are deployed. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
New presidential directive calls for U.S. to deploy weapons in space | Herm | Policy | 70 | May 26th 05 07:31 PM |
New presidential directive calls for U.S. to deploy weapons in space | [email protected] | Space Shuttle | 63 | May 26th 05 07:31 PM |
Listening to ISS: Window Shutter Open/Close Calls? | JimO | Space Station | 0 | February 13th 04 09:40 PM |
ENTERPRISE CREW SPLIT OVER VIOLATING PRIME DIRECTIVE, INTERVENINGTO SAVE EARTH FROM ITSELF | Rich | SETI | 10 | November 14th 03 04:00 AM |
Electric Gravity&Instantaneous Light | ralph sansbury | Astronomy Misc | 8 | August 31st 03 02:53 AM |