Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 397 posts

Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons

#321

Post by nomel »

FabCH wrote: post #312
nomel wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, what solution do you have in mind, if China supplies military support to an adversary? Politely ask them to stop? Let them continue? Seems not so trivial to me, especially since everyone has satellites up there for this purpose, and there's a good chance China would do the same.

Politely ask them to stop seems like a great idea to try first before you actively attack a space capable nuclear superpower!

If they did supply images, to supporting the attacks, that did or even didn't result in the death of soldiers, then they were first to commit an act of aggression towards a nuclear superpower. This is a measured response to that act of aggression. Asking politely, in that context, doesn't necessarily make sense, especially when you can just burn a few hundred million of their dollars to demonstrate why they shouldn't do that.

I think China would have done the same, but with the usual gaslighting [1].

[1] https://spacenews.com/china-says-it-remains-opposed-weapons-...

Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons

#322

Post by golemiprague »

asdff wrote: post #251
sgustard wrote: post #224

Reagan and Gorbachev came within inches of abolishing nuclear weapons, but the sticking point was the US would not back away from building space weapons. As long as warmongers are in control we will continue to live in danger and fear.

I mean in hindsight there's no way israel or china would have disarmed.

[dead]

Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons

#323

Post by jdougan »

mschuster91 wrote: post #208
wat10000 wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not quite as bad as that. Space is big and hitting stuff is really hard. Your hand grenade scenario has effectively been done a few times and it (obviously) didn't make LEO unusable. For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_satellite_collision There are thousands of pieces of debris in LEO large enough to be tracked, and a lot more that's too small to track but big enough to do serious damage. This isn't…

> Adding a few thousand more pieces of debris would not be even remotely as bad as using a tactical nuclear weapon in war would be. The worst effect would be a nuclear weapon in space. The resulting EMP would probably fry more than enough electric and electronic devices to throw back whatever country is hit by it by decades .

The EMP effect depends on there being atmosphere to generate electrical fields from the bomb gamma flux. Being close enough and line of sight from the atmosphere can be sufficient to generate the effect in the nearby atmosphere. 400km is apparently the optimum height for coverage but not strength. Too far and inverse-square ensures the flux isn't sufficient. So just detonating a bomb "in space" may not do anything depending on the direct path distance to the satellites in question (the bomb gamma flux etc. of course poses its own threat). Look it up, the physics are interesting.

Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons

#324

Post by elteto »

Revanche1367 wrote: post #307
r_lee wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the commenter never implied that they don't but anyone familiar with how China positions itself knows that they always say things like: "our space stuff is 100% peaceful we dont have any military stuff there, the imperialist West is lying! we are never aggressive, we are only peaceful and defensive" and when someone else does something they always urge them to act according to international law and to not escalate

How many wars has China started in the last century?

They mostly just massacre their own.

Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons

#327

Post by BurningFrog »

jonkoops wrote: post #8

Space 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

Unless you can enforce a weapons ban, "should be a neutral ground" means absolutely nothing.

Everyone would launch weapons while they deny it, because that is the rational and responsible thing to do.

Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons

#328

Post by andai »

eps wrote: post #292
tintor wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being the first country to put weapons in space, is far from comical. Weapons in space is like putting nukes and missiles in international waters 12 miles from coast of all other countries, to reduce strike time.

First country to admit putting weapons in space.

I was wondering, didn't they have something like this fifty years ago? Wasn't that the whole point of the space program?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Defense_Initiative

Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons

#329

Post by [deleted] »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #229
jonkoops wrote: post #8

Space 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

> Space really should be a neutral ground like Antarctica "They are dismantling these systems because they do not expect they will ever have a use for these weapons. Not because chemical weapons are immoral. Because they are ineffective, whereas landmines, cluster munitions and nuclear weapons are assumed to have future uses. Morality was never at issue, effectiveness was. That has some big consequences, most of whic…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN