|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
..New Space-Race to the Moon..History is (Tragically) Repeating Itself
"Joe Strout" wrote in message ... In article , "Jonathan" wrote: "Joe Strout" wrote in message ... In article , "Jonathan" wrote: First Bush and his Vision to the moon, then Japan, India and now China all gearing up to go back to the moon. WHY? The same reason for Apollo, we were in a ....military...race with the Soviets. The Cold War. Now....the reason everyone is going back to the moon??? MISSILE DEFENSE. Is it just me, or is everyone else's kook meter starting to swing harder at Jonathan's postings too? Which is it? If you disagree with my characterization of our space policy, how so, and why? Because, Jonathan, the Moon is useless for missile defense. Absolutely useless. Has no use for it whatsoever. None. To think that it does displays such a deeply profound ignorance that one hardly knows where to begin to correct it. Then why did Putin recently refer to discussions with Bush over a future missile defense base on the moon? Do you keep up with current events? ''Of course we can sometime in the future decide that some anti-missile defense system should be established somewhere on the moon,'' Putin said. ``But before we reach such arrangements, we will lose the opportunity for fixing some particular arrangements between us.'' No headway in U.S.-Russia missile talks Frosty relations between the United States and Russia continued as a meeting aimed at resolving a missile defense dispute made little progress. Posted on Sat, Oct. 13, 2007 BY NANCY A. YOUSSEF McClatchy News Service MOSCOW -- A much anticipated meeting Friday between Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and top Russian officials made no progress toward resolving the disputes over missile defense and other issues that have sunk relations between the two nations to their lowest level since the end of the Cold War. Instead, the meeting exposed how the high hopes that Russia and America would cooperate on missile defenses, international arms control treaties and counterterrorism have given way to fear that their differences over those issues and others, such as Iran, have recharged the rivalry between the two countries. The day began on a sour note. When asked by reporters whether the talks could lead to a breakthrough, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov replied: ''Breaks definitely, [but] through or down, I don't know.'' Russian President Vladimir Putin then kept Gates and Rice waiting for 40 minutes and mocked some of the U.S. proposals on missile defense as the two looked on, at times appearing to be taken aback. ''Of course we can sometime in the future decide that some anti-missile defense system should be established somewhere on the moon,'' Putin said. ``But before we reach such arrangements, we will lose the opportunity for fixing some particular arrangements between us.'' Gates and Rice tried to reassure the Russians that the U.S. proposal to deploy ballistic missile defenses in the Czech Republic and Poland is intended to protect Europe from a possible Iranian threat, not to counter Russia's nuclear missiles. ''It would have no impact on Russia's strategic deterrent,'' Gates said. In an effort to assuage Russian concerns, he and Rice proposed that observers and a system of ''transparency'' accompany the new missile defenses. But the Russians' problem was geography, not transparency. Lavrov called on the United States to freeze its deployment plans, which he and Russian Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov called ''anti-Russian.'' The Russians also threatened to respond to any deployments, but didn't suggest how they might do so. The United States also proposed adjustments to the Conventional Forces in Europe treaty, which limits key categories of conventional weapons and forces. Lavrov called the latest U.S. proposals nothing new, saying that although they're a step in the right direction, ``this step is insufficient.'' U.S. officials traveling with Rice and Gates rejected suggestions that the meeting was a failure, calling the agreement to discuss these issues again and to consider the U.S. proposals progress. ''I don't think we expected the Russians to agree with these proposals today,'' said a senior administration official, who spoke only on the condition of anonymity. The United States also introduced specifics of a ''Joint Regional Missile Defense Architecture,'' or missile defense cooperation, with their Russian counterparts, who agreed to consider the proposal. If embraced, the plan could take relations between the two countries ''to quite a new level,'' the official said. The Kremlin leader also said that the Cold War-INF treaty, which limits Russian and U.S. short- and medium-range missiles, was outdated because other nations are acquiring those weapons. He said it should be updated. ''If we are unable to make such a goal of making this treaty universal, then it will be difficult for us to keep within the framework of such a treaty, especially when other countries do have such weapons systems,'' Putin said. http://www.miamiherald.com/news/world/story/270162.html s Now, a merely ignorant but otherwise reasonable person might post a query like, "Hey, could it be the superpowers are planning on using the Moon for missile defense?" At which point we'd all politely reply "No, That's because you don't read the paper, or read up on US military policy. If you can't understand the following why are you even trying to discuss this issue? From Space Command Stategic Statememt for '07. "Americans have come to rely on the unhindered use of space-they will demand no less in the future. To protect the space domain and deliver effects, Air Force Space Command is pursuing investments in an array of capabilities. The United States is committed to supporting the peaceful use of space by all; however, prudence demands we ensure our Nation, Allies and coalition partners have unobstructed access to space capabilities." "We know we will be challenged in the future-both by those who wish to do us harm and by our own resource limitations. It no longer takes a sophisticated adversary to impact space and ground systems..." "We have a duty to secure the entire space domain.not just for our own military.but for our Nation and for the benefit of the free world. To do this, we must focus our efforts on two objectives - improved space situational awareness and enhanced command and control. First, we must achieve true space situational awareness.the ability to not only track and catalog any object, but also to determine its capabilities, purpose and intent. Only when we've obtained a clear picture of the entire space environment will we fully realize our second objective - enhanced command and control over space assets. http://www.afspc.af.mil/shared/media...070412-128.pdf Newbie, the Moon is much too far away; kinetic countermeasures launched from there would miss their targets by half a day or more, and optical ones would have far too much spread to be effective." At which point, the reasonable newbie would say "Oh, I see, thanks for the explanation." But you didn't do this. Instead, you posted alarmist nonsense about MISSILE DEFENSE (caps original), and when rebuttals are put forth, you ignore them and reply with insults, irrelevant news quotes, and dark hints of conspiracies. It's a bit sad to see, because you weren't always like this. Brad Guth, as far as I've been aware of him, has always been a nutball. But you were a reasonable newbie a couple years ago, with a simple passion for space solar power, which in itself is not unreasonable. But now you've gone off the deep end, alas. I'm just getting warmed up, but the post was really about China and the need for democracy there. So we don't have to waste our space program on a new military race. If you don't think we're in one, especially since the Chinese asat test, you're not paying attention to world affairs. -- "Polywell" fusion -- an approach to nuclear fusion that might actually work. Learn more and discuss via: http://www.strout.net/info/science/polywell/ |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
..New Space-Race to the Moon..History is (Tragically) Repeating Itself
"robert casey" wrote in message ... The Moon's a lousy place to park your nuke bomb missiles. It's a lot quicker, cheaper and more convenient to use submarines as nuke launching platforms. Submarines are easily hidden, and they rarely break radio silence, and they can be ordered (the subs receive only) to sail to the enemy's coastal areas and take out a few cities or mil targets. You can buy a lot of submarines for the cost of a few Moon missions. From Space Command Stategic Statememt for '07 "Americans have come to rely on the unhindered use of space-they will demand no less in the future. To protect the space domain and deliver effects, Air Force Space Command is pursuing investments in an array of capabilities. The United States is committed to supporting the peaceful use of space by all; however, prudence demands we ensure our Nation, Allies and coalition partners have unobstructed access to space capabilities." "We know we will be challenged in the future-both by those who wish to do us harm and by our own resource limitations. It no longer takes a sophisticated adversary to impact space and ground systems..." "We have a duty to secure the entire space domain.not just for our own military.but for our Nation and for the benefit of the free world. To do this, we must focus our efforts on two objectives - improved space situational awareness and enhanced command and control. First, we must achieve true space situational awareness.the ability to not only track and catalog any object, but also to determine its capabilities, purpose and intent. Only when we've obtained a clear picture of the entire space environment will we fully realize our second objective - enhanced command and control over space assets. http://www.afspc.af.mil/shared/media...070412-128.pdf |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
..New Space-Race to the Moon..History is (Tragically) Repeating Itself
"Frank Glover" wrote in message ... Yes. A case might be made for some kinds of backup communications relays (in the event that most other near-Earth milsatcoms are taken out)there,at the Moon is a not-easily destroyed platform. But only if you already had the infrastructure for other reasons. It's not justifiable by itself. And since the Chinese asat test showed just about anything in orbit is vulnerable, how does that change the equation? If we're denied orbital assets, where else could we place such intelligence gathering capabilities? It's obvious the moon is not only a much more secure than orbit but it defines the 'high ground' too. The military has been talking about moon bases since the fifties, now we have a real live reason to build them. The Chinese. And I admit, even that's a stretch. In a major war, all anyone on the Moon (or ISS) could really do, is 'enjoy' the view (a lot of terrestrial boroadcasts can also be monitored from there without much trouble), and hope there's something worth returning to, when it's all over... From Space Command Stategic Statememt for '07. They make it clear that observing and tracking is job number one in winning this space race, and they make it clear the Chinese asat test is the source of this priority. "Americans have come to rely on the unhindered use of space-they will demand no less in the future. To protect the space domain and deliver effects, Air Force Space Command is pursuing investments in an array of capabilities." "We know we will be challenged in the future-both by those who wish to do us harm and by our own resource limitations. It no longer takes a sophisticated adversary to impact space and ground systems..." "We have a duty to secure the entire space domain.not just for our own military.but for our Nation and for the benefit of the free world. To do this, we must focus our efforts on two objectives - improved space situational awareness and enhanced command and control. First, we must achieve true space situational awareness.the ability to not only track and catalog any object, but also to determine its capabilities, purpose and intent. Only when we've obtained a clear picture of the entire space environment will we fully realize our second objective - enhanced command and control over space assets. http://www.afspc.af.mil/shared/media...070412-128.pdf -- Frank You know what to remove to reply... Check out my web page: http://www.geocities.com/stardolphin2/link3.htm "When you want to, you'll find a way, when you don't want to, you'll find an excuse." - Tagolog Proverb |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
..New Space-Race to the Moon..History is (Tragically) Repeating Itself
"Pat Flannery" wrote in message ... Maybe you could give us a rational explanation of the so-called connection between returning to the moon and missile defense? Remember, this is the guy who thinks that if you wait around long enough, rocks will come alive all on their own. Ya know I can hear you! And NASA is spending another $800 million to see if those rocks are alive, maybe you should point your sarcasm at them for wasting so much taxpayer money on a hunt you say is so pathetically idiotic and kookish. I just happen to think the rovers have shown us enough to justify a closer look, the best planetary geologists and astrobiologists in the world agree. But maybe all the experts are all a bunch of kooks, and you alone are correct. Maybe, but I wouldn't bet anything on it. If they don't have some sort of giant popular uprising during the Beijing Olympics, his whole world view is going to fall apart. And if it does happen? But maybe you're correct again, and I should stop embarrassing myself by trying to do something that may or may not make a difference. Maybe no one should try to do anything more than post a few light-hearted jokes and light weight opinions. But then again, maybe I'll keep on trying until I figure out how to make a difference. No matter what anyone thinks about it. If you can't take it, you shouldn't dish it out. Jonathan s Pat |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
..New Space-Race to the Moon..History is (Tragically) Repeating Itself
"Pat Flannery" wrote in message ... Joe Strout wrote: It's a bit sad to see, because you weren't always like this. Brad Guth, as far as I've been aware of him, has always been a nutball. But you were a reasonable newbie a couple years ago, with a simple passion for space solar power, which in itself is not unreasonable. But now you've gone off the deep end, alas. When he first arrived he stated that he did drugs, I'm smoking some pot right now, so what? and that he intended to post things he really didn't really belive in to see how people reacted to them. I said I do that sometimes. So what? In short, he looks upon himself as the researcher Student, asshole. and the people in the newsgroups he posts to as something like mice running around in his maze. Or...seeing what I can learn from others. Yourself excepted, however. Your habit of googling up details on some hardware and them pretending you knew all those details all along is rather obvious. You should point out where you got the info and when, else people might think you're sadly trying to impress us with your google-sized knowledge of rocket science. If you can't take it, you shouldn't start dishing it out s Pat |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
..New Space-Race to the Moon..History is (Tragically) Repeating Itself
"OM" wrote in message ... On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 23:26:42 -0600, Pat Flannery wrote: When he first arrived he stated that he did drugs, and that he intended to post things he really didn't really belive in to see how people reacted to them. ...I remember that as well. IIRC, we also tracked him down through IP address lookups to somewhere in Puget Sound, and one of our regulars actually concluded that he was living in a flop above an old gas station. Between the drugs and the octane fumes, it's no wonder Guthball went nuts. In short, he looks upon himself as the researcher and the people in the newsgroups he posts to as something like mice running around in his maze. ...Oh, bull****. He's just making that up in a lame-assed attempt to claim he's the only sane one here. Bottom Line: The true test of sanity is whether or not you've sent Brad Guth, Jonathan, and Elfritz to Killfile Hell, where they can sodomize each other for eternity with Eric Chumpko and his wife, Fred McCall. If you haven't killfiled these trolling *******s, then you're just as insane as they are. Or as childish. Seriously. You're a pathetic little man, afraid to directly confront anyone. Your plonks are merely running away from anything you disagree with. Is that what you do in real life, run away from problems and from the truth about yourself? I bet you don't even look at yourself squarely in the mirror. It's called cowardice, it's what children, woman and faggots do, run away and pretend you didn't hear. It's no different than throwing someone the finger out the car window, then speeding away before he kicks your sorry ass. Faggot. I know, you can pretend you didn't read this, but everyone else will. And they'll see that when someone calls you out, calls you a bitchy little girl, you .....run away. If you can't take it, you shouldn't start dishing it out. And I returned the cross posting, so a thousand people will see me bitch-slap you. Jonathan s OM -- ]=====================================[ ] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [ ] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [ ] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [ ]=====================================[ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FS: Two Sides of the Moon: Our Story of the Cold War Space Race | Gareth Slee | History | 0 | September 21st 05 03:53 PM |
History Channel: Apollo: The Race Against Time | Damon Hill | History | 9 | August 16th 05 01:51 AM |
History Channel: Apollo: The Race Against Time | Damon Hill | Space Shuttle | 4 | August 16th 05 01:51 AM |
History Channel: Apollo: The Race Against Time | Brad Guth | Space Shuttle | 0 | August 16th 05 01:31 AM |