Author Topic Options
Offline

Forum Junkie

Profile
Posts: 507
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 10:01 am
 


So, what the comments here basically say is:

China good, US bad.

When the US (tries) to shoot down missles in the atmosphere, this is tantamount to arrmageddon and will lead to a space weapons race. When China shoots something down actually in space, you all shrug and could give a damn.


Offline

Forum Super Elite

Profile
Posts: 2234
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:28 pm
 


Wrong again, Michael! All my comments are saying is that the Big Dog will have to expect competition. The mini-furor in the press is nothing more than a hope of stirring the pot. The militarization of space by the US, or China, or anyone else, is just a fact. Attaching good or bad to it, or to one side as opposed to the other, is just propaganda, and a useless waste of print.

The US wants a monopoly in space for the same reasons it wiped out the native population in their own country 120 years ago. It serves their merchantile interests to do so.

Loyalty, patriotism, and the "torch of freedom" shtick are all OK for the masses, but it has nothing to do with any nation's aims and ambitions.

---
"When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change."
-Max Planck



You're just jealous because the voices only talk to me


Offline

Forum Elite

Profile
Posts: 1659
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 6:00 pm
 


Michael Scott

US shoots stuff down = bad
China shoots stuff down = bad
Other nations doing same = bad
Weaponization of space = bad
Nukes in space = bad
Nations rattling sabres = bad
ad nauseum

You getting this? I hope so because I can't make it any simpler.

---
"and the knowledge they fear is a weapon to be used against them"

"The Weapon" - Rush



Most people would prefer a comforting lie over a painful truth.


Offline

Forum Junkie

Profile
Posts: 507
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 6:06 pm
 


That I'll agree with Deacon. It's all bad. But it wasn't what you originally said... which was:

"Secondly, so they can trash a dead satellite, whoopdeedoo."

That's a big difference. So you can understand when I take exception to the comments here which basically erupt in an uproar when the US scratches their nose, but shug off hostile actions taken by the likes of China.


Offline

Forum Super Elite

Profile
Posts: 2234
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 8:28 pm
 


<blockquote> shug off hostile actions taken by the likes of China </blockquote> But if we ranted and raved over China, who would supply Wal-Mart, Sears, Canadian Tire, et al?<p>---<br>"When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change." <br />
-Max Planck<br />
<br />



You're just jealous because the voices only talk to me


Offline

Forum Super Elite

Profile
Posts: 2234
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 8:31 pm
 


<blockquote> Editor's note: Micheal Scott submitted this link: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070119.wchinatest0119/BNStory/International/home It describes the weapon as a 'missle', but others speculate it was a 'laser'. DrC] </blockquote> If the debris was as described, I doubt it was a laser, which would "plunk a hole" through the satellite, but likely not explode it. <p>---<br>"When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change." <br />
-Max Planck<br />
<br />



You're just jealous because the voices only talk to me


Offline

Forum Elite

Profile
Posts: 1659
PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 12:07 am
 


Considering that the technology to do that has been around in one form or another since approximately 1970-75, I fail to see what there is to be so up in arms about.

So they can do what Russia and the US could do for all intents and purposes 30+ years ago.

Again I say: so what?

They took out a target.

whooooooooo scary.

---
"and the knowledge they fear is a weapon to be used against them"

"The Weapon" - Rush



Most people would prefer a comforting lie over a painful truth.


Offline

CKA Elite

Profile
Posts: 3540
PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:13 am
 


"... I take exception to the comments here which basically erupt in an uproar when the US scratches their nose, but shug off hostile actions taken by the likes of China."



Sheesh!
Wudda we got here, another warlock?

Are you applying for a green card?

---
[juris ignorantia est cum jus nostrum ignoramus]

it is ignorance of the law when we do not know our own rights"

lex ferenda



"When I tell the truth, it is not for the sake of convincing those who do not know it, but for the sake of defending those that do."

William Blake

"To acquire knowledge, one must study;
but to acquire wisdom, one must observe."


Offline

Vive Moderator


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 5450
PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 9:23 am
 


Hitting thruster fuel with a big enough laser could cause a big boom. China has been known to shoot at satellites with lasers before, it's only the degree of energy that matters.

But I agree, only a few articles I read mentioned lasers, and a projectile is more likely.

---
"I think it's important to always carry enough technology to restart civilization, should it be necessary." Mark Tilden



Take the Kama Sutra. How many people died from the Kama Sutra as opposed to the Bible? - Frank Zappa


Offline

Forum Junkie

Profile
Posts: 507
PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 9:53 am
 


So why then RPW and Deacon, why the big uproar when the US tries shooting down a balistic missle in the atmosphere? That's old tech too. Just an updated version of the Patriot missle.

Big whoopee indeed.


Offline

Forum Elite

Profile
Posts: 1659
PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 2:14 pm
 


Because satellites are eyes and ears systems: you use them to see, hear, and communicate.

Other than that, they have NO capacity to take out cities, military bases and refugee camps.

Ballistic missile are weapons systems, and their job is to vaporize their targets.

Mutually Assured Destruction kept both the US and the old USSR reasonably honest, and it worked pretty damn well for making sure no one side made a cold war a hot war.

It was an "I die, you die" arrangement that kept both sides from launching their missiles.

Besides, Anti Ballistic Missile systems go against the spirit of any Strategic Arms Limitation or Reduction Treaties that the US is currently a signatory to.

For the US to so brazenly VIOLATE a treaty designed to substantially reduce the chance of a nuclear war is something to get up in arms about.

Now, unless you're a brain dead shill, surely you now see what the difference between taking out a target satellite and taking out a nuke in terminal phase.

Any nation that can defend itself from nukes in that phase has a substantial advantage over ANY possible enemy.

After you read this, and unless you need me to draw you a picture, I'll assume that you get what I'm talking about.

---
"and the knowledge they fear is a weapon to be used against them"

"The Weapon" - Rush



Most people would prefer a comforting lie over a painful truth.


Offline

Forum Junkie

Profile
Posts: 507
PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 5:30 pm
 


And almost all nukes now fly using GPS. Which is satellites. So unless you are a brainless shill, I'll assume you see how one is equated to the other.


Offline

Forum Elite

Profile
Posts: 1659
PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 8:26 pm
 


"And almost all nukes now fly using GPS. Which is satellites. So unless you are a brainless shill, I'll assume you see how one is equated to the other."<br />
<br />
Oh really?<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/icbm/lgm-118.htm">http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/icbm/lgm-118.htm</a><br />
<br />
Look at the guidance system for this IN SERVICE front line ICBM.<br />
<br />
INERTIAL. read it and weep axxhole.<br />
<br />
<p>---<br>"and the knowledge they fear is a weapon to be used against them"<br />
<br />
"The Weapon" - Rush



Most people would prefer a comforting lie over a painful truth.


Offline

Forum Elite

Profile
Posts: 1659
PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 8:42 pm
 


One last thing, Mr Scott.

The reason the AIRS inertial guidance is used is because it is self contained and NOT reliant on external reference points once it is programmed.

That means, once it's up, there nothing short of the destruct code that can stop it.

You actually thought that the US (or ANY nuclear nation for that matter) would be stupid enough to rely on GPS for ICBM guidance?

You're a funny guy.

Dumber than dogsh*t, but still funny.

---
"and the knowledge they fear is a weapon to be used against them"

"The Weapon" - Rush



Most people would prefer a comforting lie over a painful truth.


Offline

Forum Junkie

Profile
Posts: 507
PostPosted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 2:37 pm
 


Your attempts to justify your position by resorting to namecalling prove you are in the same league as Diogenes. I will treat you as such. Pathetic and unworthy of response.


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 34 posts ]  Previous  1  2  3  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests




All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Vive Le Canada.ca. Powered by © phpBB.