|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
..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/ |
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 |