Bush May Deploy Nuclear Weapons in Space

Originally posted by titus
most likely other technologically advanced countries will find a way to take those down right after those are in space...

usa is not the only country that has laser technology

ohhh, and dont forget Longitudinal Wave radar weapons... takes about a sec to take down anything in orbit

not if they want a war.

no, but our laser technology is almost operational, everyone else is still far behind actually having defensive/offensive laser weapons in operation and um Longitudinal Wave radar weapons....sound waves have been proven ineffective for weapon use and especially at that kind of distance and especially because theres nothing in space it can vibrate so as soon as it hit space it would stop instantly.


[edit on 29-10-2004 by namehere]

I BET THE PERSON THAT FOUND THIS THREAD IS ANTI AMERICA ...

Samuel Johnson once said, "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundral." I was born an American and served for 10 years in the USAF yet I am not a blood thirsty meglomaniac wishing to kill anyone whom opposses my views! I was in Central America in the early 1980's and know who is responsible for the genocide, the USA. The Guatamalan Truth Commission unearthed 669 mass-graves in the early 1990's and supplied both CIA and US State Department documents which directly implicated the leadership of the US (Ron Reagan.) After I discovered that the US was responsible for the cold-blooded murders of nearly one quarter of a million civilians, I parted with the USAF and became a decent human being.

What we have been doing in these third world countries is pathetic and wrong by any standard of decency. Now they have decided to start striking back. We have let the Israelies steal a whole country from the Arabs and can't understand why they are mad at us. The Israelis have ghettoized the entire Palestinian nation into fortified camps very much like the ghettos of Warsaw and Kiev and still we can't understand their anger. The Iranians call us the "Great Satan" why? Remember the Savak? The Shaw of Iran used the Savak, which was trained and equipt by the US, to brutally torture and murder nearly 200,000 Iranian civilians. Perhaps we deserve this label.

If being anti-American means objecting to torture, murder and genocide then perhaps I am anti-American! I believe in God and His Son said that "Those who live by the Sword, Shall perish by the Sword." The only way to stop all of this madness is to put down our Swords. This is the truest test of bravery for a man, both in the eyes of God and Allah. If we were to take an eye for an eye than the whole world would be blinded.

what do you think Nasa was launching in thoes secret shuttle missions ?

Yes Sir're Bob! What has NASA been sending up on all of those classified shuttle missions? And what exactly is the MILSTAR program all about? What about the 72 pounds of plutonium that went up on Casinni? And what was the USAF doing sending Clementine II to the moon? There is alot of fishy stuff going on with NASA, USAF Space Command and the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (formerly the Defense Nuclear Agency.) My best bet is that the US has about 25-30 warheads already deployed in high orbit in refurbished Pershing II re-entry vehicles with modified W85 (W86) earth-penetrating warheads, similar in species to the b-61 mod 11.

The only problem with all of this is that orbits decay and satellites loose power over time. If the system were to be deployed, it would only have a 3-5 year life span, so it is use it, or loose it. Perhaps they could be retrieved by the shuttle, but we are talking a huge expense for the life-cycle of each deployed attack network. Once an attack satellite goes off-line it would need to be retrieved and replaced simutaneously, only the shuttle could do this. In my opinion, this is the primary function of the entire Space Shuttle program, that is, to maintain an array of (MILSTAR) attack satallites.

Sure, if we are going to go through all of this trouble we had better have this attack network tested. Clementine II. Where better to test a space born attack satallite than on the moon. The USAF had the highest secrecy clearence placed on Clementine II and if they were just going to the moon to explore, why all the secrecy??? In 1969 NASA wanted to test a nuke on the moon, ya, but they couldn't do it because of some stupid little UN Space Treaty. Well, what if you use a very low yield earth penetrator and pop the thing off in a deep crater on the dark side of the moon? Or better yet, the South Pole of the moon where nobody has mapped it yet, who would know?

As may be apparent, I believe that they already have the attack array in orbit and tested. It's purpose is to liquidate the Russian Strategic Rocket Forces Command and Control. Aaah, but do the Russians know this? You bet your sweet a$s they do. Do the Russians have their own attack array and is it deployed? Again, if I were a bettin' man, I would bet both my left and right ventricles on it! What do you think that they have been up to at Aramaz-16 with all of those IBM RS/6000 super-computers they claim they don't have, who knows, perhaps the Sealed Grand Jury investigation into IBM's alledged sale of these computers turned up nothing? Why was the investigation sealed? And why did the Russians try to de-couple a nuclear test at Novaya Zemlya on 16 August of 1997? This was in violation of the CTBT. All seismic mumbo-jumbo aside, the Finnish seismic data showed the blast at Novaya Zemlya to be at 0 kilometers in depth, this was a de-coupled test because earthquakes don't occur a 0 km depth.

So, why am I so pig-bittin' mad about all of this? These lunatics are putting all of humanity on an extinction notice. Spoiled rotten brats who want it all, and if not, then the whole thing goes up in smoke! These dabdlers of doom are not operating with the concent of the people they represent, Russian or American! There actions are illegal and must be ceased before they kill us all!

any weaponising of space with nukes is pure insanity.

drfunk

Originally posted by Rotwang

I BET THE PERSON THAT FOUND THIS THREAD IS ANTI AMERICA ...

Samuel Johnson once said, "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundral." I was born an American and served for 10 years in the USAF yet I am not a blood thirsty meglomaniac wishing to kill anyone whom opposses my views! I was in Central America in the early 1980's and know who is responsible for the genocide, the USA. The Guatamalan Truth Commission unearthed 669 mass-graves in the early 1990's and supplied both CIA and US State Department documents which directly implicated the leadership of the US (Ron Reagan.) After I discovered that the US was responsible for the cold-blooded murders of nearly one quarter of a million civilians, I parted with the USAF and became a decent human being.

What we have been doing in these third world countries is pathetic and wrong by any standard of decency. Now they have decided to start striking back. We have let the Israelies steal a whole country from the Arabs and can't understand why they are mad at us. The Israelis have ghettoized the entire Palestinian nation into fortified camps very much like the ghettos of Warsaw and Kiev and still we can't understand their anger. The Iranians call us the "Great Satan" why? Remember the Savak? The Shaw of Iran used the Savak, which was trained and equipt by the US, to brutally torture and murder nearly 200,000 Iranian civilians. Perhaps we deserve this label.

If being anti-American means objecting to torture, murder and genocide then perhaps I am anti-American! I believe in God and His Son said that "Those who live by the Sword, Shall perish by the Sword." The only way to stop all of this madness is to put down our Swords. This is the truest test of bravery for a man, both in the eyes of God and Allah. If we were to take an eye for an eye than the whole world would be blinded.

Look at your first paragraph telling us that the Third World countries are coming back in force and we should not retaliate lol .. And then the last paragraph you are talking about how we shoujld not take an eye for an eye why ... don't you take out both your eyes and shove them up your .... well you knwo where that is going .. b/c they are not doing to any good in your head you ... are rediculous and if your father would have died in the world trade center I bet you would feel alot different. Or if your son was over there working and he got beheaded. Yeah .. that is great .. Allah loves that stuff I bet. Anyways ... =-) ...

"Nonviolence and cowardice are contradictory terms. Nonviolence is the
greatest virtue, cowardice the greatest vice. Nonviolence springs from
love, cowardice from hate. Nonviolence always suffers, cowardice would
always inflict suffering. Perfect nonviolence is the highest bravery.
Nonviolent conduct is never demoralizing, cowardice always is."

Mohandas K. Gandhi

I think putting nukes in space is ludicrous, however I would not care if they put EM satelites that could take out a military instillation in space, but I draw the line at an EM grid that could take out a country.

I BET THE PERSON THAT FOUND THIS THREAD IS ANTI AMERICA ... THAT IS WHY BECAUSE ALL YOU HOLES GO LOOKING FOR IT AND WRITE ABOUT IT AND TELL US THAT IS WHAT WE ARE ABOUT TO DO. OH AND WE ARE ABOUT TO DO THIS. AND WE ARE ABOUT TO DO THIS !!!! ... Whatever ... Bomb us and we willl kill you ...

That was a mature and well thought out response. With such a sharp mind and penetrating wit, I feel that i have been bested here....

Anyway, sarcasm hat off.... Bet555, WTF? What are you on? Seems like one to many scooby snacks, and a little bit too much of the Bush Campaign Ads.

That was a mature and well thought out response. With such a sharp mind and penetrating wit, I feel that i have been bested here....

Hew Dude, I live here in the US and this is usually the quality of political debating that goes on here. It's not only sad, but this is a good reflection of the intellectual atmosphere here, a vacuum. By intent, the Reaganites set out in the 1980's to demolish the public education system here in America. The first thing you learn in Plantation Economics 101 is that you do not educate your slaves. The Reaganites have utterly devistated the public education system in this country and have reaped great political and economic rewards for this heavy-handed fascist tactic. A university degree is virtually impossible to attain for better than 80% of the American youth, yet we live in the richest country on earth. Fascism's only home is with the intellectually depraved. These Reaganites must have been fascinated by Hitler, Mussolini and Franco. Remember Ronnie's trip to Bitburg, here's what he said in defense of his honoring a dead Nazi soldiers grave,

"I think that there's nothing wrong with visiting that cemetery [Bitburg], where those young men are victims of Nazism also, even though they were fighting in the German uniform, drafted into service to carry out the hateful wishes of the Nazis. They were victims, just as surely as the victims in the concentration camps."

What would happen if a nuke went off in space? I mean, if a country like China got wind of USA nukes in space and decided to destroy them, would this have any effect on our ozone layer or anything like that?

What would happen if a nuke went off in space? I mean, if a country like China got wind of USA nukes in space and decided to destroy them, would this have any effect on our ozone layer or anything like that?

I doubt the occasional one would do any harm, but a full scale atmospheric nuclear war cannot be good. You have to remember that our atmosphere shields us from vast amounts of cosmic rays, so a few nukes is not going to harm it. The atmosphere is more robust than people think!

Originally posted by Rotwang
Bush administration may rethink space treaty

I don't know how anyone else feels about this but I spent two years in the USAF at Headquarters Strategic Air Command and news like this scares the s*it out of me!

Rotwang,
This is really some ignorant garbage you've chosen to rant about.
Obviously you did not read the article in GovExec that you linked to.
I wonder how many others here also read it - not too many judging from the reactions. What happened to "Deny Ignorance"? It certainly has not been denied here.
The article says the exact opposite of what you are ranting about.
The article says that the following:

"If you had changes in the treaty that would represent additional prohibitions on non-WMD weapons or on other military activities that we consider legitimate under the treaty, those are actions we would not be favorable towards and we would not agree with,"

In other words, conventional weapons or "Non-WMD" weapons as the article states, is what the Bush administration considers legitimate.
This is for the National Missile Defense program - which requires space based radar and possibly conventional weapons to attack ICBM's in the mid-course of their flight.
If you really want to deny ignorance try reading this post:
National Missile Defense goes Black

Next time try reading the article that you use as a reference point before going off on a hysterical rant.

[edit on 2-11-2004 by bios]

U.S. is so undereducated. I mean look around at all of these people living here they debate back and forth who is going to be president. They should not allow any Advertising perios on the PRESEDENTIAL ELECTIONS. Everything should go by word of MOUTH. This is P. Diddy's first election to ever vote in, Doesn't that make everyone feel better at least Puff Daddy or P. Diddy or Diddy pop or Poo Diddy Boo is voting. Makes me feel alot better about the election process. I mean everyone that is my age ... that i talk to is against George W. because it is Cool. I ask them "What is wrong with George W?" They will not say anything just ...mutter " Ugh Ugh Ummm .... he ugh started the War on Terrorism and Ugh ... we haven't even been bombed or anything since then ... Then I ask about the beheadings and they are like Ugh UGh Ugh .. Umm ... We shouldn't have been over there anyways.... that is why they are doing it ... We shouldn't mess with the third world countries b/c they have not messed with us ... Well guess what if soemone from the U.S. went to france and bombed them and ran back here .. We would have him watiing on the french to get here to turn him in .... No matter who it was ... Yet, someone can do the same thing to us here in the U.S. This is not right.

Well Boys if you read the news the Russians are doing the same so take your little heads out of you behinds and get with the times>

I appriciate your reading the article and am glad that you do not buy into things lightly. Very few people offer up good critical arguments contesting what they often read. I'll admit to some sloppy inferences to this article, but I've read alot about the weaponization of space and I am rather upset with all of the research and policies that are being discussed behind the American people's back. Michael Krepon with Christopher Clary have written a very good book called, "Space Assurance or Space Dominance? The Case Against Weaponizing Space." Here is a quote taken from chapter two,

Indeed, a commission headed by the soon-to-be-appointed Secretary of Defense, Donald H. Rumsfeld, argued precisely this case in January 2001. The congressionally mandated Commission to Assess United States National Security Space Management and Organization concluded that space warfare was �a virtual certainty.� This report concluded that the lessons of history demonstrated that �every medium�air, land, and sea�has seen conflict. Reality indicates that space will be no different.� In order to avoid a �Space Pearl Harbor,� this report called for the United States to develop �superior� capabilities for �power projection in, from, and through space� in order to �negate the hostile use of space against U.S. interests.�

This was taken from the �Executive Summary,� in Report of the Commission to Assess United States National Security Space Management and Organization (Washington, DC: Commission to Assess United States National Security Space, January 11, 2001), pp. vii�xxxv.

Since it appear that you like to read, here is the link to the book at the Henry L. Stimson Center: Space Assurance or Space Dominance?

Here is also a good place to read more about the weaponizing of space: The Space Security Project

There is also a mass of current research and testing going on at the Wright Labs Armament Directorate, Air Force Research Laboratories-Space Vehicle's Directorate, White Sands Missile Test Range, Phillips Labs and the Orbital Sciences Corporation. I've been following their research on space weaponry since 1997 and have personally spoken to several engineers who have worked in these programs. Why, because the American people have the right to know what our government is up to, especially when the risks in militarizing space are as great as they are.

Here is an interesting quote from Military Space: Securing the High Ground written by Leonard David and it reads,

Military space technologists and leading aerospace firms are jointly developing the Common Aero Vehicle (CAV). An aerodynamically designed re-entry vehicle, CAV would be capable of maneuvering in Earth�s atmosphere for increased range and accuracy. The CAV will be able to hold multiple targets at risk including deeply buried, hard, and mobile targets. Delivery of CAVs could be one task of a future military space plane.

These CAV's will have and are being tested for, nuclear payloads. These are low-orbital re-entry vehicles which will have GPS mid-course guidance systems aided by a near-real time 3D seismic unattended ground sensor array to pinpoint underground targets. The underground targets are what bothers me. Who's underground targets are that important that they need to be neutralized in less than five minutes? You tell me.

each time i hate more bush always messing with the worlds safety

Rotwang,
None of the references you cite (from what I can tell), are actual policy or planned deployment of space based nukes - the references are simply future analysis from the Stimson Center, a well respected national defense think tank.

The point of contention I have is that you have taken analysis and twisted it to insinuate that thanks to George Bush, deployment of nuclear weapons in space is eminent.

Perhaps that was not your intent, or perhaps it was, and to read the posts in this thread you certainly gleaned a number of inflamed responses from people thinking nukes in space are a done deal, and that just is not the case.

Thanks Nanobyte,
I could not have said it better myself.

The evidence that space is being militarized is everywhere, it's just like an ostrich, if you stick your head in the sand you won't see the danger. Anyways, I can't prove to you that the world is round if you only rely on subjective observation. The real deal is that the Russians and the Chinese are not as niave as you fellows and your beliefs about the militarization
of space do not matter, their beliefs about the US's intentions in space are what matters. The Russians would not be building their complex at Yamantau if the believed the US's intentions in space were purley peaceful. The Arms race is on in space and if you choose to stick your head in the sand or not, makes no difference to me. Anyways, Bush is a Reaganite, which translated means, that paper treaties are for wipping your a$s.

Any Air Force General will tell you, that the best time to intercept an ICBM is when it is in the Silo. First, you destroy the Command and Control, which locks the missiles in their silos, then you use conventional bunker busters to erradicate the individual rocket regiments, one by one. This way, a vast majority of the Russian Rocket forces can be liquidated with only a handful of low-yield weapons being deployed. The mobile launchers and SSBNs is where it gets tricky, this is why the Russians are still producing mobile SS-27s (TOPOL-M) with redesigned maneuverable re-entry vehicles (MARVS) and refuse to retire their SSBNs. And where better to hide their SS-27s than under the Urals mountains. If you guys have any better explanation as to the purpose of Yamantau, other than an underground alien base, I'm all ears.

I have no argument with you on the weaponization of space - mid-course actions against ICBM's requires weapons in low orbit.
Again, my problem with this thread is the unsubstatiated claim of nukes in space - this is something you simply cannot back up and all it does is inflame the passions of the ignorant, as seen in this thread.