US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons
81–90 of 397 posts
Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
You actually think they don't already?
What would be the point? MAD relies on everyone knowing you can take them out if they attack you. What does a space weapon offer additionally that makes the huge expense worthwhile?
Not every target is on the ground.
Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons
#83Rather interesting timing after the US accused China of supplying Iran with high-res imagery used to support attacks on US bases, then a Chinese satellite mysteriously broke apart
Interesting. A bit conspiratorial, but hey. It would be a major provocation if so
Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons
#84Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
Say goodbye to satellites and space tourism for the next 200 years :(
Kessler trashes LEO and yes, "space tourism" because that means bare orbital joyrides and those would become unacceptably hazardous for a tourist attraction. But it makes no real difference for GEO or outer orbits, or for leaving if we, or more likely a non-human probe wanted to leave Earth's orbit. So, no Starlink, but you'd still have COSPAS SARSAT in a reduced form, you'd still have geostationary telecoms birds, s…
Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons
#86Rather interesting timing after the US accused China of supplying Iran with high-res imagery used to support attacks on US bases, then a Chinese satellite mysteriously broke apart
Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons
#87Space really should be a neutral ground like Antarctica. Especially since the consequences of space debris might trigger the Kessler effect [1], denying humanity future access to low-earth orbit for the considerable future. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome
There is the Outer Space Treaty (1967), which forbids placing "nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in orbit or on celestial bodies or station them in outer space in any other manner", but you can get around that by saying that it's just a conventional weapon, not nuclear or WMD. If it's for space to space combat, you could say that any weapon is potentially a WMD due to the Kessler potential, but if…
> in the event that you land in a forest or similar.
I was very confused and wondered where this was going!
Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons
#88How is this smart? US was already able to strike any place on the globe, what happens if this motivates the US enemies also have weapons in space and then US mainland becomes strike-able. What was the thing that the US military previously couldn't blow up? The enemy now can have giant piece of hard metal in orbit and blow up previously %100 out of range data centers for example. Very unwise action on US part.
I always find it funny here, how out of all the targets "the enemy" could hit, HN-er is afraid they'll hit the datacenters :) You don't need space weapons to hit datacenters, you need one van full of explosives and someone willing to die to deliver it to a datacenter. To temporarily disable them, you just need a cheap drone with some explosives.
Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons
#89I hope one of these days we can get our priorities straight.
Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons
#90Space really should be a neutral ground like Antarctica. Especially since the consequences of space debris might trigger the Kessler effect [1], denying humanity future access to low-earth orbit for the considerable future. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome