Radio Telescope Has Military Uses?

schnippy writes "A joint Mexico-U.S. effort to build a monster radio telescope in Mexico is causing concerns because the project, the Large Millimeter Telescope, is part of a U.S. Defense Department effort to develop the target acquisition and directed-energy technology needed for anti-satellite warfare." From the article: " Supporters said links between science and the military are nothing new and emphasized the telescope being assembled on the 15,000-foot Sierra Negra in the state of Puebla wont be some kind of Star Wars defense outpost."

Comments

Darn

[antikarma]

...the telescope being assembled on the 15,000-foot Sierra Negra in the state of Puebla wont be some kind of Star Wars defense outpost.
That's a shame. Puebla does look remarkably similar to Tatooine...

Nice opening line...

[Chaffar]

A joint Mexico-U.S. effort to build a monster telescope atop a dormant volcano...

Why does this sound to me like a "bad idea"? This would be a great start for a thriller/action movie ...

[Dramatic Voice]Atop dormant volcano in Mexico... containing an ancient Aztec burial ground... the construction of an American military complex awakens undead souls... Disturbed from their sleep, they thirst for revenge... Only one man... can hope to defeat them...

and what if it is?

[OffTheLip]

Since the link between science and the technology of war or peace, depending on your perspective, are entwined why can't it be used for alternative purpose? The fact my microwave oven had it's roots in defense does not stop me from using it.

construction progress

[mxpengin]

here is a site with pictures of the constructio progress and a link to a coral cache of the page.

the article

[siddesu]

seems to focus on the worries of a Mexican senator about the source of funding of the project - mostly DARPA (according to the senator). The question is not what prompts this interest at this particular moment -- because I am sure funding data was available for years to the interested parties. Could the reason for this stunt be the general election in Mexico next year?

Re:Silly.

[argStyopa]

Please don't take this as a flame - it's not meant as such at all.

1) The Continental Army fought much the same way as the British army. The idea that the Americans 'hid behind rocks and trees' while the British fought in lines is a tired old chestnut with no basis in fact. Both sides used skirmishers, light troops who fought from cover, to great effect. The Brits were unhappily surprised by the lethality and range of the American rifles, but in general the US Army was beaten in almost every engagement except for the critical battles of Saratoga and Cowpens.

http://theamericanrevolution.org/battles.asp

2) to suggest that the Americans have somehow routinely relied on deception and ambush thereafter is simply misreading the facts. Until recently, American militaries were NOT known for their subtlety - the Civil War, the Spanish-American War, WW1, WW2, Korea, and even the failed efforts in Vietnam were almost entirely about a standup, face-to-face battle where the US won more by its overwhelming resources than by its surprise attacks or deception.

Again, this isn't meant as a flame, I simply think your interpretation is entirely wrong. Your parallel of "the US abandoned honor in war = Iraqi terrorists abandoning honor" thereby implies very dangerously some sort of 'moral equivalency' between the American revolutionaries and the Iraqi jihadis. While I recognize that no doubt SOME Iraqis are fighting for purely nationalist reasons, it's not their main motivation.

I would argue that the Shiite uprisings against Saddam that we failed to support (to our shame) were a far closer parallel to the American revolution.