Air Force Seeks Bush's Approval for Space Weapons Programs

[happychem]

I'm with you Reiver. There's always an excuse to spend more resources on ways to destroy. I'm glad that the US is the only world superpower and am quite happy for it to stay that way. But I've yet to see any reason why space needs to be weaponised. All that will lead to is other countries (ahem, China) feeling threatened and thus dumping more money into their own weapon systems than they already are. It's all cold war b.s. to argue that they could possibly catch us so we need to have more, bigger, better weapons than someone could possibly, maybe, in the future acquire.

I'm not gonna say that we should all lay down our weapons, join hands, and sing kumbaya, but I don't think that increasing killing power or ability is a goal to be saught out. Does your government's defense spending outstrip your health spending? Should a you be spending more money to try to kill someone else then you do to make yourself healthier? Just some food for thought.

 

[NowherMan6]

Does your government's defense spending outstrip your health spending? Should a you be spending more money to try to kill someone else then you do to make yourself healthier? Just some food for thought.

Ahh, but do you want your government to be responsible for your health, and every other personal aspect of your life? Alas, I do not. I'd rather them spend money on finding ways to hurt those who would hurt me, and leave it at that.

Besides, it's foolhardy to not plan for the future. It's foolish to not think two steps ahead when it comes to defense. Would you rather your government be prepared, or would you rather them say, "We're gonna wing it if the time comes..."

 

[happychem]

I've always found it interesting, if paradoxical, how strongly American people believe in the strength and equality of democracy but then want that democratically elected government to stay as far from their lives as possible.

Who do you want in charge of your health? A government elected by you and ultimately answering to you, or a company whose sole goal is to make money off you?

It's not an issue of not planning for the future, it's an issue of not being one dimensional. You can create an endless cycle of arguments to say that we always need to keep developing more weapons, but that just means that those who allegedly want to hurt you, I'm guessing you mean China since it is the only country with the means to develop a comparable military, will also need to develop bigger and worse weapons to keep up.

While we're on the topic of "those who would hurt [you]", who are these mysterious people who would hurt you? Certainly not the Chinese. While they do have a desire to have a comparable military in order to be able to add weight to their opinions, they have nothing to gain through hostilities with the West, too much money involved. The Chinese economy is stronger now than ever before, entirely due to trade with the west. Not terrorists. The weapons being discussed would be completely useless against terrorists.

These weapons are only useful against larger scale targets, which means that you're talking about invasion of a country, or at least attacking targets within a foreign country. Yeah, I know that the last part is obvious, but in order for you to be able to argue that an enhanced ability to attack a foreign target is needed you first must prove that there is an enhanced threat, or at least that there is likely to be one, from a foreign country, one that cannot be better (or equivalently) dealt with through the existing means. Of course, all of this only matters if you're arguing that these weapons are for "defense" and not for offense. If you simply believe in world domination then there's no need to rationalize a threat to yourself.

I am very interested (no seriously) in which country you believe poses a potential threat.

So far the logic for such devices have only saddened me: namely in that, as a scientist, I need to rigorously prove that what I claim is consistent with the data, but apparently to get billions of dollars in weapons dollars all I would need is to hint that there's the slightest possibility of a threat.

 

[slipknottin]

I've always found it interesting, if paradoxical, how strongly American people believe in the strength and equality of democracy but then want that democratically elected government to stay as far from their lives as possible.

Who do you want in charge of your health? A government elected by you and ultimately answering to you, or a company whose sole goal is to make money off you?

I believe we should save that for another thread. :shark:

 

[happychem]

Hehe, that is a big ole' can o' worms, ain't it?

 

[NowherMan6]

happychem,

I assume most of that was directed at me. However, I am officially withdrawing from this thread on the grounds of, "nothing good could possibly come from taking this argument further." Should we someday by chance meet up in a bar I'd be more than happy to continue this debate, I just feel that off-topic threads on aquaria-related websites are not the proper place for heated and detailed political debate. Quips and short opinions? Sure. But anything more is usually a bad idea. I completely respect your opinions but I do not wish to take this any further.

...but then want that democratically elected government to stay as far from their lives as possible.

I pray I'm not the only person out there who wants the government as far from my life as possible...

 

[125gJoe]

...- the Chinese are constantly working on improving their defensive and offensive capabilities. Some day I'm sure there will be a fight for the skies.... ...

Do I sense a hint of nervousness about this on your part, Joe?

You are darn right I'm nervous about it. My opinion is, it's only a few months away when new weapons will fly again. I don't think some will just sit back and let Dictatorships build and sell nukes. Where the situation goes, we'll just have to see as we don't control much of it at all...

Even Pres. Bush asked rather bluntly, why do the Iranians feel they have a need for more 'energy'? ..hint, hint....

Link on satellite weapon: http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app3/xss-11.html

 

[slipknottin]

My opinion is that if any of these countries (china, iran, etc) attempt to match US spending and technology they will nearly collapse their own economics. No other country is anywhere near being able to finance such military operations. Even the Soviet Union at its peak could not spend anywhere near as much as we could, and its attempts to do so severely weaked in, not strengthened it.

A large military with good technology is useless if you have no money to finance its operations.

 

[judgemax]

whats really interesting to me is that the airforce and nasa started out as one then the government split the two! now we are trying to use the airforce for space travel ...why not just use nasa intelligance and go from there...thats where we get all our space info anyway!

 

[slipknottin]

whats really interesting to me is that the airforce and nasa started out as one then the government split the two! now we are trying to use the airforce for space travel ...why not just use nasa intelligance and go from there...thats where we get all our space info anyway!

Because NASA has become the UPS of space. NASA spends too much money ferrying things into space to consider using its knowledge to do something important. BTW- NASA is essentially a subsidized business, its subsidy kills off its competition. Meaning private businesses will never attempt to go to space because they cant compete with NASA.