Comments on: Fight For Space Assets, Don’t Just Deter http://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/10/24/fight-for-space-assets-dont-just-deter/ Online Defense and Acquisition Journal Tue, 16 Mar 2010 18:47:45 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Radarnavhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/10/24/fight-for-space-assets-dont-just-deter/comment-page-1/#comment-3219 Radarnav Mon, 10 Nov 2008 23:55:41 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=2066#comment-3219 Sam, International law states that an attack on a nation's orbital assets is an attack on that country. So, it is completely logical to indicate that we will retaliate.I am concerned that US citizens and US Lawmakers have no clue as to the extent that the US economy is totally dependent on space assets.Think of this: If you were an adversary, why attack a National/DoD space asset, when you can totally cripple the US economy by selectively interfering/disrupting certain transponders that carry all financial info to the banks, etc. Shut them down in mid-stock market or inject totally bogus numbers, etc. Panic would quickly over-ride rationale decision making. Sam,
International law states that an attack on a nation’s orbital assets is an attack on that country. So, it is completely logical to indicate that we will retaliate.

I am concerned that US citizens and US Lawmakers have no clue as to the extent that the US economy is totally dependent on space assets.

Think of this: If you were an adversary, why attack a National/DoD space asset, when you can totally cripple the US economy by selectively interfering/disrupting certain transponders that carry all financial info to the banks, etc. Shut them down in mid-stock market or inject totally bogus numbers, etc. Panic would quickly over-ride rationale decision making.

]]> By: Samhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/10/24/fight-for-space-assets-dont-just-deter/comment-page-1/#comment-2663 Sam Fri, 24 Oct 2008 19:36:26 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=2066#comment-2663 I think this case is overstated. The national space policy states clearly that space capabilities are "vital to the national interest." This is loaded terminology that basically implies that an attack on them will guarantee retaliation. Plus, physical protection of satellites is extremely difficult. Protecting satellites requires both deterrence and defense in proper measure. I think this case is overstated. The national space policy states clearly that space capabilities are “vital to the national interest.” This is loaded terminology that basically implies that an attack on them will guarantee retaliation. Plus, physical protection of satellites is extremely difficult. Protecting satellites requires both deterrence and defense in proper measure.

]]> By: DensityDuckhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/10/24/fight-for-space-assets-dont-just-deter/comment-page-1/#comment-2661 DensityDuck Fri, 24 Oct 2008 16:17:45 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=2066#comment-2661 Butterworth speaks of "defenses". I'm curious as to what he means. Butterworth speaks of “defenses”. I’m curious as to what he means.

]]>