Obama and his space weapons ban

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 8:35 am

\"President Barack Obama's pledge to seek a worldwide ban on weapons in space marks a dramatic shift in U.S. policy\"

Is he really as smart as he is and yet this naive when it comes to foriegn policy?

Work on classified projects involving an \"active\" military response to attacks against U.S. satellites might be halted in favor of more monitoring and passive protection measures, he said. He declined to give any more details.

More 'monitoring and passive measures' is like what Clinton did with the N. Koreans regarding weapons grade nuclear material production! And they in turn laughed at Clinton, took all he gave them to stop production and at the same time continued development!!

I keep telling myself Obama's too smart to shoot America in the foot like that but with all the Pelosis in charge if he thinks he can publicly say we won't do it and then count on the defense department to do it covertly I think he's crazy. Knowing your congress is run by wacko liberals like Pelosi you end up in jail for life trying to get the job done.

Reagan had the confidence of guys like Oliver North who understood the duty. Obama has the confidence of who?!?

Let make a prediction for you all to remember in about 50 years: He who can't fight in space is living under the umbrella of his enemy!

SilverFJ · Post by **SilverFJ** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 12:21 pm

He won't have to worry dude, he'll be busy at a beach barbeque with Hamas somewhere at the time.

d3jake · Post by **d3jake** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 3:51 pm

Wasn't there a ban like this back during the cold war..?

SilverFJ · Post by **SilverFJ** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 5:13 pm

Reagan DID try and institute a national space-based laser missile defense system...

Gooberman · Post by **Gooberman** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 5:42 pm

Will Robinson wrote:Let make a prediction for you all to remember in about 50 years: He who can't fight in space is living under the umbrella of his enemy!

The problem with weaponizing space for national defense, is no other country in the world views that as "defense!"

If we do it, others will follow suit, in the name of "defense." And what then? Will we borrow more money from the chinese to make ours better? They already own our proverbial nuts, and that wasn't Clinton or Obama's doing.

Duper · Post by **Duper** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 6:05 pm

I thought Carter was first to bring this up in the SALT treaties. .. then Reagan usurped that. You know.. Carter, the guy you called a fool.

For now, I think it's a good effort. If there comes a time when moving around in space is more common place then it should be reexamined, but for now with merely un-manned platforms (that could be hacked) I think it's best to keep such things on the ground.

Take for instance Princess Diane; she fought against land mines and see where that went? ... she didn't live to see it to fruition, but it was noble cause.

... does that mean I'm calling Obama noble?? ...hmmm >_>

lol

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 9:25 am

Gooberman wrote:...
The problem with weaponizing space for national defense, is no other country in the world views that as "defense!"

If we do it, others will follow suit, in the name of "defense." And what then?...

The problem with your theory is you assume no other country see's it as defense but they won't do it unless we do!!
Of course they understand the offensive capability of weaponizing space and that is why they won't hesitate to establish a military capability there regardless of whether we do it or not!!

Duper wrote:I thought Carter was first to bring this up in the SALT treaties. .. then Reagan usurped that. You know.. Carter, the guy you called a fool.

Actually it was Nixon's baby and Carter inherited it and now Obama has the opportunity to be just as foolish as Carter was in buying into the notion that 'only if the U.S. provokes these enemies will they do bad things...'

The agreement Carter had handed to him wasn't ratified because the USSR didn't live up to it and they invaded Afghanistan and were getting heavy handed in Cuba/South America.
As I recall Reagan's position served us well and I can't find the same results coming from Carter. Carters biggest impact on foreign affairs was acting on the advice of his national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski arming of the mujaheddin in Afghanistan which directly led to the creation of al Queda!! Granted Reagan nor Bush Sr. or even Clinton did anything to change things in Afghanistan after the fact but Carter boldly cracked open that Pandoras box for us all.

Gooberman · Post by **Gooberman** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 6:44 pm

Will wrote:The problem with your theory is you assume no other country see's it as defense but they won't do it unless we do!!

The problem is I know they will do it if we do! Right now every country gets to say that.

I am sure DARPA funds research in this area, and I am sure we will be ready if need be.

I just don't think we should be the first ones to take our guns out of their holsters in a time of relative peace. Especially after we just scared the crap out of the world with this preemptive war stuff. Pretend you are not an American for one second.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 7:55 am

Ummm, Goob? Wasn't it the Chi-Coms that were the first and only country to actually shoot a satellite? With the great dependence our military has on space based guidance and communication system, I would think we would want to be able to protect them.

Kilarin · Post by **Kilarin** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 8:39 am

Whoever is at the top of the gravity well wins. period. You don't want to be in a rock throwing contest and be throwing rocks UP at the people on top of the cliff. You don't want to be standing under the cliff where the guys with the rocks are. You want to be on top of the highest cliff with your own piles of rocks.

If Iran wanted to actually have a CHANCE to whoop the rest of the world, all they need to do is build a peaceful space program. Launch some communication satellites, and then, one day, suddenly launch a thor system instead.

If we don't own space, whoever does will own us.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 8:40 am

woodchip wrote:Ummm, Goob? Wasn't it the Chi-Coms that were the first and only country to actually shoot a satellite? With the great dependence our military has on space based guidance and communication system, I would think we would want to be able to protect them.

Ehhh…didn’t we blow one up under the guise of preventing the radioactive crap from returning?

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:49 am

I think you are right Spidey. Question is, who did it first so the other side can say, \"We didn't start it\".

Gooberman · Post by **Gooberman** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 12:07 pm

This example you gave is right where I think we should be. We should have the capability, but not demonstrate it without need.

It goes to the heart of that saying...

We should fund the stick, we should research the stick, we should develop the stick.....

...But I don't see why at this point in time we need to....quite literally....be waving it above our heads.

Dakatsu · Post by **Dakatsu** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:09 pm

It's one thing if we put like, SDI up in space. I would consider that a passive defense. It's when we do crap like placing a GDI Ion Cannon floating around ready to blast on command that we make a LOT more enemies, and incredibly weird looks from our allies. We have barely used space for civilian purposes, let alone any need for military weapons floating around.

I find it inevitable that in the future, when we do have other planets colonized, that space weapons will be common. But I think while everyone is on the ground, we shouldn't be the first to weaponize space. If we do it, hell, everyone else will think they can too!

We should be able to shoot satellites out of the sky from the ground though, in case someone else places space weapons up there and decides to use them.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:35 pm

If I put a weapon platform in space, I sure as hell wouldn’t let you shoot it down with some ground based missile.

Dakatsu · Post by **Dakatsu** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:34 pm

Spidey wrote:If I put a weapon platform in space, I sure as hell wouldn’t let you shoot it down with some ground based missle.

Tell that to Mr. Missile

Kilarin · Post by **Kilarin** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 3:04 pm

Dakatsu wrote:Tell that to Mr. Missile

Tell Mr. Very Expensive and Complex Missile climbing slowly up the gravity well to meet Mr. Cheap and Simple Slug, fired at high velocity DOWN the gravity well.

Bye Bye Mr. Missile!

Seriously, if you aren't at the top of the gravity well, your chances are slim. The first country to seriously weaponize space will be very, VERY difficult to dislodge. If they've done it right, virtually impossible.

Neo · Post by **Neo** » Tue Feb 03, 2009 3:29 pm

Obi-Wan wrote:It's over, Anakin! I got the high ground!

....don't try it!

^_~

Kilarin · Post by **Kilarin** » Tue Feb 03, 2009 8:20 pm

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090203/ap_ ... iran_space

Iran has the ability to put something in orbit. This is a LOT scarier than any nuclear program.

flip · Post by **flip** » Tue Feb 03, 2009 8:55 pm

Yeah I think Iran is a perfect candidate for a spawn kill

.

Pandora · Post by **Pandora** » Thu Feb 05, 2009 9:13 am

ROFL
that was hilarious (although spawn kills are unethical, of course

)

Obama and his space weapons ban

Obama and his space weapons ban

Re: Obama and his space weapons ban

Re: Obama and his space weapons ban

Re:

Re:

Re: