Europe Building Their Own GPS

An anonymous reader writes "BBC News is reporting that Europe is planning to build their own satellite-navigation network that will be backward and forward compatible. There's going to be 5 levels ranging from free (1m accuracy) to commercial (1cm accuracy)! Provision is also being made for a search and rescue mode where a signal can be sent to confirm that help is on the way. The system will supposedly even work with existing US network after upgrades to the network."

Comments

Nice to have a backup...

[Docasman]

... for when the Bush administration realizes terrorists might be using GPS with Google Earth.

Re:Don't forget: GPS can equal targeting data

[CodeShark]

Yup. Except that you left out the part where a mass-murderer kept up a pretense of having WMD for over ten years, harassed and ultimately got rid of the UN inspectors who were attempting to verify compliance, etc., and it was Hussein's unwillingness to submit to the UN resolutions to open up his former WMD plants, etc. for inspection that triggered the invasion. Had the prior Iraqi regime complied without even the months long final warning process (let alone the ten plus years prior), no bombs, tanks, or other assorted objects that go boom would have ever been needed.

Which means that your point is absolutely invalid in terms of the US acting unilaterally because the US-led coalition was acting in 100% accord with established international convention and law, not the world's popularity contest.

Re:Don't forget: GPS can equal targeting data

[CaymanIslandCarpedie]

Which means that your point is absolutely invalid in terms of the US acting unilaterally.....

I didn't even realize I was trying to make such a point. I thought I was just pointing out just one recent example of the US doing exactly what you said we don't need to worry about them doing.

George Bush on foriegn policy: When in doubt, whip it out.

Re:I wouldn't have much confidence either...

[pedigree]

Quick, point a stick at the French, see how fast they can press the huge surrender button on their government issues portable surrendar devices.

Re:Don't forget: GPS can equal targeting data

[Pantero Blanco]

If someone goes around carrying something covered-up that looks like a machine gun, refuses to show it to anyone when asked, and gets tackled by police and arrested, it's their own damn fault. Especially if it's someone that broke into a house a while back.

Re:Don't forget: GPS can equal targeting data

[CaymanIslandCarpedie]

The "innocent until proven guilty" is when the person goes to trial. That's not the concern at arrest. So under that scenario and applying Anglo-American criminal law to the Iraqi invasion, there would still be reason for invading and then putting Saddam on trial to sort out the details thereafter.

I guess thats where we disagree. To me invasion of a foriegn country is like the death penalty not like an arrest. I cannot be undone and all the innocent lives lost cannot be broght back. I think Bush's doctine of pre-emptive strikes and unilateral action are VERY dangerous. The last thing I was to see is wars started because of maybes and I think sos. If you go to war I think you better damn well know for sure. Not just kill tens of thousands of people and then "sort out the details thereafter".

Re:Don't forget: GPS can equal targeting data

[CaymanIslandCarpedie]

Saddam kicked the UN inspectors out whenever they thought they were going to find anything. By the time they were ever able to search a building, the Iraqis had had months of time to remove anything that had been there. There were articles about that just about every month in the news, both online and on paper.

OK, first I'll put on my tin-foil hat for just a second. Yes, there were always reports about this by the news organizations. When do you think such news organizations get thier best ratings and circulation? Thats right when they are talking about how the US military is blowing the crap out of stuff or better yet when they can show it live. OK, tin-foil hat coming back off now ;-)

Hey, I'm not saying we should have just walked away from Iraq and ignored it, I'm asking why invade and kill so many people (US and Iraqi)? Here (again) is something that wasn't nearly as widely reported on. Leading up to the war, UN inspectors were actually getting great cooperation from Iraq. I don't think there can be any exact time estimates, but many at the time were saying if this level of cooperation remained the inspectors could have finished inspections and issued final reports in perhaps as little as 6 months. Yes, this cooperation in response to the pending US invasion and all the related pressure that caused, but that just show Saddam would respond to this pressure. Why invade when you know you can get what you want by the mere threat and presense of your troops? Keep the troops there to keep the pressure on and let the inspectors finish the job. If Saddam gets out of hand you can then use force to put more pressue on him. Preferably force with as little leathality as possible like the limited air strikes you mention. Then as a last resort if all else fails you always can invade if absolutly requried.

But why invade when we did? They made some lame attempts to tie it to terrorisim, which were dimissed. We now know the intelligence about WMD was sketchy at best and the more we the public find out the more its hard to believe those in the know really belived it themselves. We'd gotten a favorable response from Iraq in working with inspectors to verify all this reguardless. So why invade when we did? I'm left with Bush's own statements about wanting to attempt to turn Iraq into a democracy which might spread through the regin. In that light he couldn't allow inspections to continue for fear they may find Iraq didn't have any WMD and thus remove his last excuse to invade and try his democracy in the mid-east experiement. I don't find that a compelling reason for war. Even if it all works out just like Bush hopes, I don't think the ends justify the means.

Re:... and the reason is:

[susano_otter]

So you're saying the idea that the armies of Europe could compete with the armies of America is not a laughable idea?