Comments on: Space: Deter, Defend, Defeat And?

By: propellerhead

propellerhead — Wed, 07 Jul 2010 21:19:41 +0000

Bottomline is thus: Do we wish to remain the pre-eminent power in humanity or not. Humanity must expand perminantly to a multi-planetary species or become non-existnat in the very long term. In the shorter term, the money is in the high ground, which means it is a repeat of the 1600’s: Whoever puts feet on the ground, gets it. To start with, the feet on the ground part is the key item. China and India have already staked out their choice spots on the Moon for colonies (He3, rare materials, electricity, and key–water for people and fuel), Japan has already demo’d asteroid to Earth resource path. The US, by Gov’t AND commercial means, must begin exploiting space resources in the very near term (next 10–20 years) or become just another buyer. Resources off-planet are the key to strategic commerical power in the future. Did I mention Brazil is a player too?

By: roland

roland — Wed, 07 Jul 2010 13:22:13 +0000

We all ask this question at some point: How long will it take to travel to the stars? Travelling to the stars at long period of time was not yet created. Our space shuttle can only travel at a limited location and time. The theory about the use of super nuclear propulsion, ion drive propelled smart-1, or a solar powered ion thruster to power futuristic space ship, to travel to the stars have never been tested yet. As long as we have’nt tried and tested it, such space vehicle may never come to realization.

By: Ron

Ron — Tue, 06 Jul 2010 22:26:41 +0000

The worlds largest powers, not including the United States, are moving forward at a very excellerated pace to advance themselves in space and space technology. Along with that will come advancements in weapons both defenseive and offensive. Meanwhile, this administration has handcuffed are very ability to pursue advancements by implementing a very restrictive budget. Security for the United States is not only from terrorists on the ground, but from possible future strikes that may come from a country or countries of which are now considred friendly. We, the United States, must continue to develop our space program or risk the very security that we have or now perhaps had.

By: Ron

Ron — Tue, 06 Jul 2010 22:16:33 +0000

Feb. 21, 2008..the United States shot down a spy satellite that was retuning to earth. It was one of our own, but we still had the ability to shot it down.

By: Dog Face Liberal

Dog Face Liberal — Tue, 06 Jul 2010 17:17:53 +0000

I am reminded of the old adage concerning the wisdom of not using the bathroom in the same area you eat.

Every time a satellite is destroyed in orbit, hundreds of additional pieces of debris are cast about Earth orbit.

In the interests of safety for manned space flight operations perhaps it is for the best that no additional live fire tests are conducted.

By: DensityDuck

DensityDuck — Tue, 06 Jul 2010 16:30:25 +0000

…yeah, by ONE, considering that the Chinese have shot down two.

By: Tony C

Tony C — Tue, 06 Jul 2010 11:09:25 +0000

The US is without a manned space system for the first time since the 1960’s and this administration wants to be a player in the game? Seems to me that he is more interested in illegal aliens than technological advancement to provide jobs and technological innovation. The health bill is a payback to all the groups that helped get him elected and now we are officially broke!! What a joke, the rest of the world thinks we are morons.

By: William C.

William C. — Tue, 06 Jul 2010 04:12:54 +0000

I wasn’t aware a Nike-Zeus missile had destroyed a satellite. How low was it?

The ASM-135 ASAT was certainly a promising program, but was canceled, personally I think it is an idea that should be resurrected. A modified SM-3 did destroy a satellite but that was in a low, decaying orbit.

By: Rick W

Rick W — Tue, 06 Jul 2010 01:52:57 +0000

May 1963 a Nike-Zeus missile destroyed a satellite with a nuclear warhead.
September 1985 an ASAT launched from an F-15 fighter destroyed the Solwind P78-1.
February 2008 USS Lake Erie shot down an NRO satellite.

You either live in an alternate reality or you died quite a while back.

By: War Hammer

War Hammer — Tue, 06 Jul 2010 00:09:27 +0000

Really? name one… I dont recall the USA ever shooting down any satellites. The did prepare for it though, but it never happened and it will never happen, not in our life time.

By: Rick W

Rick W — Mon, 05 Jul 2010 20:57:26 +0000

That’s a really odd comment to make about the USA. Our country that has shot down more satellites than any other nation on Earth.

By: William C.

William C. — Mon, 05 Jul 2010 16:55:21 +0000

Says the guy who would rather risk the Chinese blowing up our satellites just because they feel like it so he can get his Obamacare…

By: stinger

stinger — Mon, 05 Jul 2010 07:16:29 +0000

How is anyone going to govern a place as vast as space.There is no law, no boundaries, and no way to enforce it if there were. Just remember the old saying.……“What goes up.……must come down” That is a broad statement but true today as it ever was.

By: Oblat

Oblat — Mon, 05 Jul 2010 05:52:45 +0000

Yep fund the technology and then work out what the policy is.
As usual bill has it exactly the wrong way around.

By: Bronco46

Bronco46 — Sun, 04 Jul 2010 22:52:48 +0000

obama and is people are great at talk. But with the irresponsible spending coming from this regime there will be little left to defend our borders, much less space. We’ll be lucky to not wind up like the Greeks, and many other European countries who can no longer afford to defend themselves.

By: roland

roland — Sun, 04 Jul 2010 19:14:28 +0000

I guess beginning with the idea of space exploration is not a bad idea, but it is also good to know what’s on our wallet to fund this project. God gave us the universe to explore. But the question of how is still on the air.

By: Gray Eagle

Gray Eagle — Sat, 03 Jul 2010 16:45:19 +0000

Sometimes, I wonder how many of these “Policy Wonks” have a basic understanding of orbital mechanics.

By: William C.

William C. — Sat, 03 Jul 2010 07:30:42 +0000

What I mean to say is that if we don’t have the equipment to back up our policies, they are meaningless and won’t be respected by any other nations.

I don’t know what the policy says about destruction of satellites, but for example, if we don’t have an ASAT weapon of our own, we may not be able to deter some nations from destroying an American satellite in “their” space.

By: RSF

RSF — Sat, 03 Jul 2010 05:53:03 +0000

William C:

Are you saying that technology development is more important then clearly defining our policy on using space?

I would think that policy should develop along with technology, or we could run the risk of starting a new arms race.

By: William C.

William C. — Fri, 02 Jul 2010 16:28:23 +0000

Policy is just a stack of papers without investment in the technology and equipment to keep ahead in space. We also have to be willing to step on some toes at times, because the Chinese certainly are.