Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Deploys Orbital Communications Jammer
kpwoodr writes "An interesting article at the Washington Times makes note of a recent satellite launch by the U.S. It seems we have put a jammer in space that will allow us to disrupt enemy communication systems at will. From the article: 'The U.S. military is bracing for future attacks in space, and the Air Force has deployed an electronic-warfare unit capable of jamming enemy satellites, the general in charge of space defenses says. "You can't go to war and win without space."'"
I can't blame the hurricanes on Bush.
:)
But I can rightfully blame the fact that there are huge numbers of people out there cheering for them on Bush.
Also, I can kill you with my brain.
Zonk, again you've blown it. If you read your summary, you've written " Washington Times makes note of aa recent satellite launch by the U.S..."
I don't get this -- what does "Alchoholics Anonymous" have to do with satellites?
Oh, I get it -- it is a spelling mistake. This is why the Jihad hates you, Zonk. You have stupid editing mistakes in your articles. Please try it again, this time with a spellchecker.
http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/when_to_
Yeah, they spent the money... but the weapons still aren't nearly good enough (witness multiple thousands of civilian collateral deaths in Iraq as the latest example)... doesn't make them pause when thinking about going to war anyway.
Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
The Urban Hippie
Oh good sir thank you so much. How I wish I had mod points for you! Seriously people seem to selectively forget that the US have saved a good many of their asses on a few occassions. I think the world likes to use the what have you done for me lately attitude, which seems to be nothing in their eyes. There was an editorial commentary or paper written a few years back post-9/11 that was written by a foreigner...Canadian if I remember, about how much the US has done for the world and despite the crap we take on a daily basis how open the country still is to refugees and political dissidents from other countries, let alone the "political dissidents" within our own country.
/. and some people in this country remember these things. It seems that everyone is too busy protesting (cause they are rich yuppie middle class losers afraid of defending their homes) when they haven't seen a war in years. I would challenge everyone to find a WWII vet on Nov. 11 (or heck before if you have time) and ask them what it was like to defend their homes. I would say ask a Vietnam War vet, but you need to find one that didn't drug his mind away during the war to do that, but I am sure despite a good many dissidents, you will still find people who were honored and proud to serve their country. And to those people who believe in defending their homeland from whatever present threat, I commend them.
If memory serves me right, the conclusion was that the US would taking in as many people as it could to help any group of people in trouble or being persecuted in their homelands, but how many of the countries throughout the world would be willing to take in a single American if, forbid, some great tragedy or inquisition of some sort began in the US. It is important for people in other countries to remember that the big, bad USA is still going to come around and try to help free people stay free. Remember we have help control of more nuclear weapons for a long time, but we have not used them in years. Have we had chances? Yes, their use was discussed during the Korean War, and I wouldn't be surprised if it was even re-discussed recently.
I am glad to see some people around
"Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb."
B-17 then. Personally, I'll take a B-52 over 10 of the Billion $ Stealth Bombers any day. But it isn't the plane we are really discussing, it's about bombs and targets. We could drop a GPS bomb from a blimp and it would have the same accuracy as from a bomber.
So accurate compared to what? Even in Gulf War I we dropped a lot of ordinance. We spent Millions of $ to destroy one $100k SCUD. Any one strike can decimate a target -- but don't tell me we always know the target. If we always hit the target, and always have the right target, it would only take 10 sorties of the B52 to finish a war.
In Gulf War I we saw a lot of video from missile cameras of perfect hits. Wow. But how many mega tons of weapons did we drop. Simple math tells us that we bomb a lot more than there could possibly be targets of opportunity in all of Iraq.
The only point I'm making is that as we make our weapons smaller and more accurate, we are going to just hit MORE TARGETS. It will still be plane load after plane load pounding the "enemy" with as much as we can. I've heard rumors of a lot of new mass graves in Iraq, that more than 100,000 Iraqi civilians have died, but the lady who was supposed to report these statistics was "accidentally" killed by friendly fire as she was leaving Iraq. All we are accomplishing is more convenient death and destruction. In the end, is anyone better for these advances? Are we safer?
I'm just fed up with "better weapons" and "cleaner wars" right now. I want better leaders and fewer wars. There is no sacrifice and no "pain" that I feel sitting here all safe and sound in the USA. I don't really know what is being done "for" me. I think all we've accomplished is making warfare "easier" and more palatable. In Iraq, I don't think there has been a net benefit to civilians. Not bombing water supplies and electrical plants would have done a hell of a lot more than a precision bomb to ease some pain.
>>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
The short of it is that the only reason America got involved was not because they were answering some call for help but they themselves became involved.
Check your history a bit more closely. You'll find that the President wanted to get the U.S. involved much earlier. It was the naysaying liberals, the bedwetting isolationists and their minions in Congress, that kept us from getting in earlier. Japan gave the President what he needed most: a reason to go to war that no one would argue with. However, if the shortsighted bastards who were fighting to keep the U.S. out of the war had shut their stupid pie-holes a bit sooner, WWII might've been much shorter and a helluva lot less bloody.
Of course, none of this is lost on the current crop of liberals seeking to undermine the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Not only are they unwilling to learn from history, but they apparently like being doomed to repeat it.
I've served in Iraq already and I'm back from my tour. Things are not nearly as bad there as the media is reporting, and the media seems to be scrupulously avoiding mentioning anything good that is going on there. Yes, there are insurgents. Yes, they are setting off bombs. Yes, they are killing people and making havoc. But they represent a very, very small portion of the population and the area of the country. You'd never know it from the news coverage, but I guess the fact that these damned liberals have never set foot in the country they're so eager to criticize makes them more of an expert than a Marine who's been in country already.
In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
From an American who's proud to be one, unequivocally supportive of your actions and presence in Iraq, thank you for your service.
Every soldier and marine I've come across has said the same as you regarding the situation there vs what's reported. IED's and suicide bombers disguised as civilians get more ratings than the good things going on, though, because the news audience in the US is largely liberal. But hey, the shoddy journalism is being exposed, slowly but surely. The NYT is laying off some folks, readership is down, etc. Don't let it overshadow the good things you and the people you were with have done.
"Everything is a weapon." he said, and then he went on to declare some empty metal barrels were Weapons of Mass Destruction.
--- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---