Skip to comments.
Think Tank Warns Against Space Weapons Systems
Space.com ^
| January 22, 2004
| Tariq Malik
Posted on 01/22/2004 5:18:02 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-53 last
To: Cincinatus' Wife
This is essentially the same argument used by the Nuclear Freeze and Disarmament types. IOW, our bad behavior will cause others to respond.
There is a nugget of truth to this, but it shouldn't cause us to overlook the obvious.
Much of our current military supremacy depends on our use of space. Thus, any country (i.e., China, Russia, or the EU) that wants to take us on militarily is going to go after our space assets. That's the only way they stand a chance on the battlefield.
Space will be weaponized. That's just the facts of life.
41
posted on
01/22/2004 10:19:44 AM PST
by
r9etb
To: Cincinatus' Wife
Space weapons were invented with the Sputnik and rocket proppeled nukes in the 50s.
These people should not blame the US.
To: r9etb
IOW, our bad behavior will cause others to respond. I consider it national security. I have no desire to be a guinea pig for the next, communism will work if you do it right, experiment.
To: Cincinatus' Wife
This "think tank" appears to be empty.
44
posted on
01/22/2004 12:33:23 PM PST
by
Spruce
To: Spruce
Well put.
To: Cincinatus' Wife
Should the U.S. military "weaponize"
space, the report states, it will most likely be affect global commerce, weaken American ties with other nations and eventually lead to
space weapons proliferation as other groups develop countermeasures or their own
space weapons systems.
Just take out the word "space" and you can see this think tank's true agenda/belief system. They're nuts.
46
posted on
01/22/2004 12:57:31 PM PST
by
xm177e2
(Stalinists, Maoists, Ba'athists, Pacifists: Why are they always on the same side?)
To: xm177e2
Certifiable!
To: Atlantic Friend; Cincinatus' Wife
They say America must not put weapons in space because other countries would follow. A.F., thanks for pointing out how hollow this paper is. I found more at their site on Space Assets and the War in Iraq:
Instead of seeking dominance in space, the United States national security interests are best served by a "space assurance" posture. Space assurance requires better monitoring capabilities, so that troubling developments or anomalous events can be discovered quickly. A space assurance posture also requires new initiatives to lessen U.S. vulnerabilities in space or at ground stations servicing space assets. The United States must be prepared to respond quickly to troubling developments. Continued laboratory research and development into space warfare capabilities could help reinforce caution in other states, given the ability of the United States to compete effectively in this realm.
A good defense in space does not require going on the offense. Space assurance, unlike space dominance, promises the continued benefits to the United States of the twin revolutions in military affairs and space-aided commerce.
What a notion. "Surrender is peace," how Orwellian.
At the bottom of each of these notions is the idea that no one country should ever become so powerful that it "threatens" another, no matter how morally superior that country may be. So despite America's century-long history of liberating third world countries and defending the western world from the hordes, we hear this kind of thing again and again.
How fitting it is that a Frenchman would remember to stand up for us in support of our strategic strength. Also, from what I understand, France is not as far behind us technologically, if at all.
48
posted on
01/23/2004 4:44:47 AM PST
by
risk
To: risk
What a notion. "Surrender is peace," how Orwellian. Peace through stength.
To: Cincinatus' Wife
Not to mention that we need a reserve of space military assests already in orbit before any conflict begins.
50
posted on
01/23/2004 4:53:37 AM PST
by
Rebelbase
(Miserable failure = http://www.michaelmoore.com/ put it in your tagline too!)
To: risk
Well, to this Frenchman, what they say about "Space assurance" makes sense, you know. What doesn't make any sense at all is how "space assurance" could not be coupled with "space deterrence", or even "space dominance". It's like saying "let's prepare us for a possible war, but not too well, because who knows what could happen then?".
As long as you don't bomb Kourou or Paris just for the fun of it, that's OK with me ! LOL. Hmmm, come to think about it, Paris COULD use a little urban renewal.
As for mastering the technologies, NASA recently said the European Space Agency had reached the level where they could compete with it, which is, to me, a nice compliment given NASA's achievements.
To: Atlantic Friend
Another good reason for France and America to cement another 100 years of even closer alliance. Something tells me there is a rumble of change coming for France, too. See, we had it in California -- so you can have it on the Riviera. The polls lie and the newsroom managers and editors are still smoking that marxist sedative.
52
posted on
01/23/2004 7:21:05 AM PST
by
risk
To: risk
Amen to this.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-53 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson