A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Space Station
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

..New Space-Race to the Moon..History is (Tragically) Repeating Itself



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old November 29th 07, 01:41 AM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station,soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
Jonathan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 705
Default ..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/

Ads
  #52  
Old November 29th 07, 02:11 AM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station,soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
Jonathan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 705
Default ..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  
Old November 29th 07, 02:23 AM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station,soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
Jonathan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 705
Default ..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  
Old November 30th 07, 12:27 AM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station,soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
Jonathan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 705
Default ..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  
Old November 30th 07, 12:38 AM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station,soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
Jonathan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 705
Default ..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  
Old November 30th 07, 12:52 AM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station,soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
Jonathan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 705
Default ..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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:21 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2020 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.