Cheney knows things nobody else does, just like with Saddam's WMD. Trust him.

Well, since other countries lack the technology to build space weapons, the only reason for such negotiations or such treaties is to hinder the United States from protecting our equipment in orbit.

Best to let the world know, now--we're not interested in talking about it. If the New Guineans and the Sudanese and the Ivory Coast and Sri Lanka want to sign a treaty not to deploy space weapons, good for them. Pointless, but who am I to stand in the way of diplomacy?

I saw that James Bond movie, wasn't it Golden Eye?

"Well, since other countries lack the technology to build space weapons, the only reason for such negotiations or such treaties is to hinder the United States from protecting our equipment in orbit."

To hinder the United States from protecting our equipment in orbit from other countries which lack the technology to build space weapons.

The self-retorting retort does not come any plainer than this.

Thanks, wrongiswrong.

Hans

The libs want us to be exposed to every threat out there. The party of appeasement is going to destroy this nation.

Boaz, please, do yourself a favor: get an education.

It's not a self-retort. Our satellites can be hit with rockets launched from earth--even some Arab countries have managed to outsource rocketry. Ditto for SDI--just because other countries have missiles doesn't mean they have the capacity to shoot other missiles down. Geez.

What these countries cannot do is space-based laser systems. Even if they did develop the technology, I wouldn't mind if they were to deploy it. It's good when other countries defend themselves.

nanook..........the ole uneducated right deflection AGAIN.......give it up......


I can hear the russian official right now from the documentary say in english that it was reagan's refussal to take star wars off the bargain table that helped to bring them down....now I know that every lib out here knows a hell of a lot more than that russian official...even though, you know, he was there..and you will say this is bullshit.....but I think the russian trumps you here........


now nanook...let me get down to the liberal level of that last sentence....

I believe the russian ..so fuck you all you ignorant stupid liberal assholes.....


see how better it is when you have an EDUCATION in manners......

and please dont have a hernia over the last couple of lines.....it was done at least partially in fun and not directed solely at you......so cheer up.......and no matter how many deadly hits the liberal dems have taken.......'everythins gonna be all right"

Seems like common sense that we'd want to stay ahead of the curve being that countries where a majority of people chant "Death to America" multiple times every day in their mosques will have nukes within a decade.

Sure, we should have the right to develop weapons for outer space. We should also have the common sense to focus on more practical problems. If all you do is focus on defence and ignore infastructure you end up with nothing to defend.

Death to America. That's our problem! Too many factions. We can't get over the political infighting. It took 9/11 to get the two poitical parties to stop fighting long enough to defend us.Then as soon as we attacked Afganistucky, it was back to the same old partisan infighting again. When will we unite to protect our land and children and the future of our people?
These people need only go on the internet to see America is in the throes of death and won't survive another generation if we don't unite and stop hating everything our leaders do. Some libs look for every opportunity to make Bush look like a fool. Conservatives look or every chance to bash lib desisions. It reminds me of Rome before it crumbled.

Libs cry and whine about the war and "what's the exit strategy". The exit strategy is victory! Democracy, peace, and freedom for the Iraqi people are the exit strategies!!!
Like it or not we're there. If we don't want to face this enemy again in the all too near future, we must unite NOW to end the enemy's hold over the people and our opinions!!

pleasantville- har har I agree soo much!!! Remember Rome crumbled from within!

I just want some FREAKIN LASER BEAMS!!

Yeah, all those Arab countries launching weapons platforms into outerspace... we gotta protect our DirectTV satellites!!! Screw Star Wars, thats 70s crap. I want Starship Troopers! You think Jar-Jar Binks knows crap about defense? THe only good bug is a DEAD bug!! That's the crap we need, "Ratchek's Roughnecks HOOWAH"!!!

Hans beat me to it, that was the most self-contradictory statement I have seen yet from BL2.

I'm not against space-based defenses, and I am pretty sure I have read elsewhere that many military satellites have defenses on-board already (what they are and how they work I haven't the slightest).

But please don't try and justify their existence by any current threat from Arab countries that chant "Death to America". I mean get a grip, how deep does your paranoia run? Any idea how hard it is to hit a satellite with a groundlaunched missle? Neither do I, but I hear its pretty damned hard... even our Patriot missle systems are not terribly effective, and those aren't even after outer-atmospheric targets.

"I can hear the russian official right now from the documentary say in english that it was reagan's refussal to take star wars off the bargain table that helped to bring them down....now I know that every lib out here knows a hell of a lot more than that russian official...even though, you know, he was there..and you will say this is bullshit.....but I think the russian trumps you here........"

Now I've heard everything..... Star Wars led to the fall of the Soviet Union??? ROFLMFAO

Which one was it, Return of the Jedi? Must of been the whole good overthrowing evil, and those cute little Ewoks, is what did Russia in. HAHA

actually if you have to know.....that middle one of the prequals BORED THEM SO BAD...they said,......thats all we can take......we give

"But please don't try and justify their existence by any current threat from Arab countries that chant "Death to America". I mean get a grip, how deep does your paranoia run? Any idea how hard it is to hit a satellite with a groundlaunched missle?"

Talk about self-retorting. It is not "paranoid" to assume that people who chant for your death multiple times every day may intend to cause you harm. I suggest you look up the word "paranoid" before using it again.

You misunderstood my post in general. I was not necessarily talking about defending satellites. These "space weapons" could very well be a dead end. I was talking about leaving the door open to developing any new military technology given that those countries most likely to become our enemies are catching up.

"Talk about self-retorting. It is not "paranoid" to assume that people who chant for your death multiple times every day may intend to cause you harm. I suggest you look up the word "paranoid" before using it again."

Intent to cause harm and capability to cause harm are two different things, especially when we are talking about doing both those things IN SPACE, as in 200+ miles above the surface of the earth and the mud huts those people chanting "Death to America" live in.

But hey, that's what makes people who think the way you do charge into Iraq to "defend our country cause they hate us, and they might have weapons, but uh... I know we've never seen them capable of reaching our shore with a missle but HEY they hate us.... did I mention that?". THAT'S what makes you paranoid....

"These "space weapons" could very well be a dead end"

They were a deadend in the 80s with Reagan's ray-guns.... have we finally discovered blaster technology??

"US Insists on Right to Develop Arms for Outer Space"


YEAH!

As with any "culture of life" we are in a never ending pursuit to develop new and better ways of killing people.
Bombing people from space is necessary in our goal of promoting global terror, (of the American flavor).

Go Bush! Go "Christian nation"! Go "culture of life"!

Arms for space? You'd need a helluva set of deltoids...

The real problem here is volcanoes. It's ony a matter of time before some nefarious nation learns how to exploit the mighty volcano and use it against the U.S. in a terror-related something-or-other. We need to develop more anti-volcano technology.

Any idea how hard it is to hit a satellite with a groundlaunched missle?

* * * * *

Actually, the physics to destroying satellites are very simple, but doesn't involve shooting and hitting them. The simplest way is to compute the intended orbital path, and send a rocket with a small container of sand or tiny pebbles released in a small arc. A satellite hitting them minutes or hours later would disintegrate in under a second, along with any other satellites on the same path. Relatively simple and inexpensive.

Fortunately, though--there's no sand in the Middle East.

If we don't want to face this enemy again in the all too near future,

When did we ever face an Iraqi enemy in the War on Terror?

Like it or not we're there.

Classic Bush rational: "I fucked everything up, so you better clean it up."

It's good when other countries defend themselves.

Like Iran?

The simplest way is to compute the intended orbital path, and send a rocket with a small container of sand or tiny pebbles released in a small arc.

Yeah, really simple. Let me bust out my TI-83 graphing calculator and my launchpad with rockets capable of mid earth orbit.

"Intent to cause harm and capability to cause harm are two different things, especially when we are talking about doing both those things IN SPACE, as in 200+ miles above the surface of the earth and the mud huts those people chanting "Death to America" live in.

But hey, that's what makes people who think the way you do charge into Iraq to "defend our country cause they hate us, and they might have weapons, but uh... I know we've never seen them capable of reaching our shore with a missle but HEY they hate us.... did I mention that?". THAT'S what makes you paranoid...."

Where to start.... I thought you misunderstood me before but then I explained my position and you still misrepresented it (even blaming me for the Iraq war, which is a nice touch). I must therefore assume that you can't address the point I made and must resort to strawman arguements. Basically, you suck.

Once again, I am not talking about defending satellites. I am talking about developing new military technology that may be useful in defending us in the future. That may include space based weapons and it may not. I'm just saying leave the door open because the minds that develop new technology are alot more creative than you or I and may come up with something neither of us would think of in a million years. And it may save lives some day. Why stifle them because other countries who could care less about us don't like it?

And your mud huts comments are just assinine. If you learned nothing from 9/11 that is your problem. There is really no reasoning with a person who still talks this arrogantly about our enemies after they dropped two skyscrapers on our heads using a plan that many today still insist was "impossible" to carry off...

Another giveaway to the military-industrial complex.
Eisenhower was right.

The Outer Space Treaty was considered by the Legal Subcommittee in 1966 and agreement was reached in the General Assembly in the same year (resolution 2222 (XXI). The Treaty was largely based on the Declaration of Legal Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, which had been adopted by the General Assembly in its resolution 1962 (XVIII) in 1963, but added a few new provisions. The Treaty was opened for signature by the three depository Governments (the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States of America) in January 1967, and it entered into force in October 1967. The Outer Space Treaty provides the basic framework on international space law, including the following principles:

the exploration and use of outer space shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries and shall be the province of all mankind;
outer space shall be free for exploration and use by all States;
outer space is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means;
States shall not place nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in orbit or on celestial bodies or station them in outer space in any other manner;
the Moon and other celestial bodies shall be used exclusively for peaceful purposes;
astronauts shall be regarded as the envoys of mankind;
States shall be responsible for national space activities whether carried out by governmental or non-governmental activities;
States shall be liable for damage caused by their space objects; and
States shall avoid harmful contamination of space and celestial bodies.
98 States have ratified, and an additional 27 have signed the Outer Space Treaty (as of 1 January 2006).

If you learned nothing from 9/11 that is your problem.

Actually, wasn't one of the main lessons of 9/11 that we were wasting too much time and money worrying about Star Wars and Space-based defences when we should have been concentrating on more realistic security measures?

we are in the midst of preventing iran from gaining a dangerous milatiristic might. we, along with the few allies we have left, have the power in the here and now so we might succeed (assuming one of our remaining allies doesn't help them out). this is not anything new, btw, it's just that this time it is iran, it's nuclear arms and the stakes grow higher as everytime a weapon of mass destruction falls into a new pair of hands. the odds are also increased that some whack will actually use them.
so who is going to prevent us from putting weapons in space? no one. and these days america does what it wants.
there's no value judgement meant in any of this, just a matter of fact truth.

mankind has increased its technological prowess to the point that we can destroy easily, quickly and concisely though we have not the wisdom to used them. hopefully we have enough NOT to use them.

i mentioned once that of all of the films that i wish would come to life, 'the day the earth stood still' would be on the top of the list. some alien comes down with a threat that either you clean up your back yard and play nice or we'll return soon... & we won't be bringing donuts.

peace

After listening to all these intellectually reasoned arguments, I came to the conclusion that lets build the goddam thing and drop it on Osama's head.

After listening to all these intellectually reasoned arguments, I came to the conclusion that lets build the goddam thing and drop it on Osama's head.

Posted by cornuto at 2006-06-14 05:49 PM

Bush would never allow an attack on Saudi Arabia.

"Actually, the physics to destroying satellites are very simple, but doesn't involve shooting and hitting them. The simplest way is to compute the intended orbital path, and send a rocket with a small container of sand or tiny pebbles released in a small arc. A satellite hitting them minutes or hours later would disintegrate in under a second, along with any other satellites on the same path. Relatively simple and inexpensive"


Where did you learn such physics RIR?

Home school?

The sand would orbit too dumbass.

Mista - lol. Our resident-expert-in-everything RiR must be googling like mad to figure out how to answer you. But remember, if it is good for his portfolio, it is good for America. And he will pay all his taxes, like his mommy told him to.

I think Mama Cass said it best when she said " I want a sandwich"