![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I am NOT a Trump supporter,and would not have pushed for a Space Force
just yet,but now that there is one I would rather not see it dissolved by a Biden administration just because it was Trump's initiative. Does it seem likely that such a punitive action would be taken? -=-=- The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again, at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Louis Epstein pounded on thar keyboard to tell us
I am NOT a Trump supporter,and would not have pushed for a Space Force just yet,but now that there is one I would rather not see it dissolved by a Biden administration just because it was Trump's initiative. Does it seem likely that such a punitive action would be taken? There would have to be a rational reason that would convince the Senate not to override the action, and doubling the money already spent creating the SF (by having to spend to undo things) doesn't seem a good idea without more being achieved. I suspect that there were people in the Pentagon who thought this was a good idea even before Trump "thought it up", and perhaps they now have sufficient consensus to keep it going. Biden's role is likely to be deciding who wins in turf disputes about specific systems, commands, or policies when the AF and the SF can't come to an agreement. Side note: one explanation I encountered long ago for the lack of German carriers in WWII was that the Luftwaffe didn't want anyone else controlling planes. /dps -- Trust, but verify. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
JF Mezei wrote:
On 2020-10-15 19:08, Louis Epstein wrote: I am NOT a Trump supporter,and would not have pushed for a Space Force just yet,but now that there is one I would rather not see it dissolved by a Biden administration just because it was Trump's initiative. All governmnets will be stuck with huge post COVID debts. **IF** Having a seperate branch of military ends up costing more in overhead etc than re-integrating it to where it was before, I am guessing it could be done. I suspect the "Space Force" being more public is a problem to the military who may not want "Space Force" to handle its intelligence satellites, so Space Force may be just management of GPS satellites. It might be interesting to see it go into NASA if, at the end of the day, all it does is pub lic non military applicatiosn such as GPS. The Space Force claims it is streamlining and cutting out layers of management.But it's smaller than an Army Corps that is headed by one three-star general,and has apparently two four-star and six three-star billets. -=-=- The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again, at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
NASA is a business and will do what it has to to secure its position | RichA[_1_] | Amateur Astronomy | 3 | May 5th 14 03:11 PM |
Are you objective, I mean, surviving because of secure layers? | C. Y. McLure, PAP | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | August 13th 07 08:23 AM |
GIOVE-A2 to secure the Galileo programme (Forwarded) | Andrew Yee[_1_] | News | 0 | March 6th 07 12:48 PM |
Space Warfighter, Interview with Commander Air Force Space Command | jonathan | Policy | 8 | November 29th 06 12:46 PM |
Space Warfighter, Interview with Commander Air Force Space Command | jonathan | History | 11 | November 29th 06 12:46 PM |