Slashdot Mirror
President Trump Directs Pentagon To Create New 'Space Force' Military Branch (defensenews.com)
Gunfighter shares a report from Defense News: President Donald Trump on Monday appeared to sign an executive order directing the Pentagon to create a new "Space Force," a move that could radically transform the U.S. military by pulling space functions variously owned by the Air Force, Navy and other military branches into a single independent service.
"I am hereby directing the Department of Defense and Pentagon to immediately begin the process necessary to establish a Space Force as the sixth branch of the armed forces," Trump said during a meeting of the National Space Council. "That's a big statement. We are going to have the Air Force and we are going to have the Space Force. Separate but equal. It is going to be something. So important," Trump added. "General Dunford, if you would carry that assignment out, I would be very greatly honored." Dunford responded in the affirmative, telling Trump, "We got you." The oddity of Trump's statement was that it was followed up with a White House readout that "contained no language related to the creation of a new military branch, leaving open the question of whether Trump has actually issued formal guidance to the military," reports Defense News. It is believed that Trump still needs the support of Congress to actually establish a space force.
"I am hereby directing the Department of Defense and Pentagon to immediately begin the process necessary to establish a Space Force as the sixth branch of the armed forces," Trump said during a meeting of the National Space Council. "That's a big statement. We are going to have the Air Force and we are going to have the Space Force. Separate but equal. It is going to be something. So important," Trump added. "General Dunford, if you would carry that assignment out, I would be very greatly honored." Dunford responded in the affirmative, telling Trump, "We got you." The oddity of Trump's statement was that it was followed up with a White House readout that "contained no language related to the creation of a new military branch, leaving open the question of whether Trump has actually issued formal guidance to the military," reports Defense News. It is believed that Trump still needs the support of Congress to actually establish a space force.
Dammit
He'd make the perfect mascot.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Is there any subject he can't bring racism into?
If we don't have Gundams, what's the point?
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Should be in San Francisco.
"Space Force" just doesn't sound right for some reason.
This kind of stuff takes a lot of money. Is there any proof or compelling evidence that we *need* a space force separate from what our current military provides?
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Here come the W.E.N.C.H.E.S.
"Women's Emergency National Corps, Hospitality & Entertainment Section" for those who've never read "All You Zombies"
"Freedom in the USA is not the ability to do what you want. It is the ability to stop others from doing what THEY want"
Trump wants to be a war President as war Presidents most often get their 2nd term.
.... Seems like cyberspace is the more pressing thing to defend.
...for those of you in here, old enough to remember that, this will bring a little smile on your wrinkled faces.
What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
We need more federal agencies for the taxpayers to support! Drain the swamp! That is what it means, right?
So he wants to be a 'war president" and yet ends the Korean war, and works hard on bring peace to the region? As its says in the book I'm currently readying, "You are as addled as an unhatched egg abandoned in the sun." An that is Truth.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
Do you think anyone in his administration has mentioned to Trump that the United States is bound by a treaty, ratified in 1967, which specifically forbids militarization of space?
Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies
https://www.state.gov/t/isn/51...
I mean, I understand that he wants to do anything he can to distract us from the fact that his campaign manager is sitting in a jail cell, his personal attorney is spilling his guts and his administration is keeping children in concentration camps on our Southern border, but does he really think anyone but the most dedicated MAGA chud is going to think the SPACE FORCE is anything but the butt of future jokes?
You are welcome on my lawn.
It seems mr. Trump runs out of treatis to back out of here on earth.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
NO it's in Cheyenne Mountain!
Oh, the one-liners almost write themselves.
"It's fascinating to see an administration that's so anti-science enthusiastic about something that requires so much science."
"I hear the first job of the Space Force will be to build a really, really big wall to keep the green people out."
I bet with another tax cut!
America is so great right now
This 'would' be interesting if it's first task was to establish military basis on the moon and mars within the next 10 years. Fully funded.
Can't imagine it will happen, BUT it would make for an interesting point where those promoting space exploration could use Republican talking point and say we need to settle mars to have a strong military. It is a matter of national defense. Having lived in north dakota where it is political death to vote against 'agriculture' I can imagine there are some uses in having space exploration marked as 'critical for national defense' with a republican controlled congress who, if they don't fund it will be 'voting against veterans and a strong military'.
âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
Four: Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines. Five, if you count the Coast Guard, but they're DHS not DOD except in time of war.
around the whole planet! We'll make space pay for it! And we're gonna tariff the hell our of Jupiter! And any Martians that dare try to sneak through our wall, asylum or not, will have their little baby critters put into a small box and shaken! Because America... errr... Earth!
Thank little baby cheesus for family values and fiscal conservatism.
Moron...
Korean war was never ended, only an armistice was reached.
This is the worst of Reagan's brean-dead mind boggling expenditures in the name of "conservatism?" and you traitors of no particular ideology eat it up because a traitor promised it? Lol. Mueller's keeping a promise also!
The Air Force has satellites, the Navy has satellites, the Army has satellites. Consolidating 3x management resources into one is mind boggling expensive, how exactly?
Service guarantees citizenship!
Jesus saves and takes half damage.
I mean come on? At the very least, you'll get to play laser tag in zero-G.. how bad could that be?
If it helps develop research and development into space stations and long range spacecraft then it's a good thing, for non-military reasons.
As for a real military mission, defending our satellites and taking out an adversary's really can be decisive in modern war. To loose GPS, imagery, and flash heat sensors (to detect enemy missile launches or strikes) would be a huge loss, again a space faring adversary.
However, I have long believed orbital space is a competency of the Air Force and that deep space should be a competency of the Navy. The Navy is all about self sufficiency far from any assistance. They also have the experience with being locked up in tiny spaces for many months, in submarines.
I do wonder, if we go to war with Russia--what happens on the International Space Station? Do they duke it out in hand-to-hand zero-G combat? What if it's taken over by the Russian crew complement? Do we send in space marines? What kind weapons would be, eh hem, safe? No conventional firearms. Even tasers could destroy vital systems? Maybe some kind of net shooting device? How would you train for zero-G combat? There is, as of yet, no martial arts for that.
It's all interesting to think about. I also wonder if, on the bright side, a Space Force would give some business to SpaceX or Blue Origin. That would be a helpful for their efforts.
Also CIA, NSA and the NRO. Also maybe some of the NASA stuff also. http://www.nro.gov/about/nro/w...
hmm... may be long term money saver if you only need slightly more the 1/3 the staff to maintain things, of coarse the problem is usually people getting what they need through 'proper channels' when this happens. I doubt anything will come of it, or at least they will likely not take over satellite operations.
âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
Mainly because, the Air Force, Navy and Army will continue to have satellites, and this will just add more. Take the air force for example. When the coast guard has to perform a search and rescue operation, do you think they call up the air force and ask to borrow a helicopter and a pilot? Do you think the Army does that? Navy? Marines? How about boats? Does everyone go to the Navy when they need a boat?
Consolidating 3x management resources into one is mind boggling expensive, how exactly?
So now every satellite can use the same design process as the F-35, so they can attempt to surpass it as the most expensive military boondoggle in history.
remember, voting against rockets ( and bases on mars) is a vote against the national defense and veterans.
âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
How do you defend your flank in space?
All Trump did with N. Korea is escalate the situation then deescalate it to the previous level.
"Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
Are the Japanese alright with the US raising and converting the Yamato for space travel? And don't we need to go to Mars to get the plans for the wave motion engine first?
"works hard"
We talking about the same guy here?
It sounds expensive.
Its consolidating what they are already doing in other branches so there is not really any new expenditures.
I may be mistaken but my recollection is that Congress was involved in splitting off the Air Force from the Army and creating a new armed service.
In any case, pray to God that Trump is not involved in the new uniform design.
Congress schmongress. I'm big and fat and I SHOUT LOUDEST.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
You may wish to read the link you posted.
The President did not announce a plan to put nuclear weapons in space.
A space force is the perfect thing to create if you don't understand Physics!
You can go up, and if you have some fuel left over you can possibly do something else, then come back down.
If you decide to blow a few things up, it's Kessler Syndrome time!
That was the turning point of my life--I went from negative zero to positive zero.
Which is a brilliant way to look like you're getting shit done when the people who care have attention spans that give gnats a run for their money.
You're right. And how about those three branches of government? That's a total waste, total. All they do is argue with me, I mean with each other. The American people elected me king, by a majority of 48% against 52.
Make America great again, like it was in 1775.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
You might wish to read the page you linked to, or at least its summary, at the top of the page. The President has not announced any plan or intent to put nuclear weapons in space.
> which forbids militarization of space?
It does no such thing. Did you forget about SDI and the hundreds of military satellites currently in orbit?
It doesn't really matter that the Coast Guard operates as part of DHS instead of the DOD except in war time, they're still a branch of the armed forces, just as the Marine Corps is, even though it's actually part of the department of the navy.
You're not hearing about "the treaties prohibiting militarization of space" because there are none.
There is a 1957 treaty about putting NUCLEAR weapons in space.
Did you forget about SDI and the hundreds of military satellites currently in orbit?
Should read "King Trump", not "President Trump".
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
> all those treaties prohibiting militarization of space
Which treaty is that, exactly? The 1957 treaty talks about putting NUCLEAR WEAPONS in space. The President has not announced any plan or intent to put nuclear weapons in space.
Did you forget about SDI and the hundreds of military satellites currently in orbit? Or for that matter, ballistic missiles, which fly through space? There is no treaty prohibiting militarization of space.
For that matter the Army has its own aviation service, it's just statutorily limited to rotary aircraft.
Does it really make sense to tell the Army, "You can fly, but only using certain technologies."? Wouldn't it make sense to allow them to fly ground attack aircraft, just like the Marines do?
The Marines are not always allowed to fly a ground attack aircraft. For example they are not allowed to fly the A-10 despite the fact they would love to and the Air Force brass hates the A-10. The A-10 is not aircraft carrier capable so the Department of the Navy says no A-10 for you.
Everything will be fine.
Really? I'd like to know more...
"Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
This kind of stuff takes a lot of money. Is there any proof or compelling evidence that we *need* a space force separate from what our current military provides?
Its just something to give up when in negotiations with North Korea. Trump is just manufacturing perceptions for the upcoming bargaining.
That's because US defense doesn't actually need a separate space force.
From its inception, the US space program has discreetly served US defense needs, along with its higher profile exploration and scientific missions. In addition, the Army, Navy and Air Force have quietly developed space commands and technologies, without creating the public perception that we're militarizing space.
There may be things that the US military services want from space that they don't have yet, but creating a separate space force doesn't get them those things. It's only value is political; it's just posturing for domestic consumption. And that posturing will have international consequences we won't like.
As soon as we create the perception that we're militarizing space, we'll start an open arms race with China. Russia too, but it's China we'll have to worry about. Russia will be making a killing transferring technology to countries that want to gain a military foothold in space for reasons of national prestige, and that'll spread ballistic missile technology all over the place too.
Space is a place where the status quo works in our favor; it's not indefinitely sustainable, but shaking up the status quo in space is about the dumbest thing we could do.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
The one thing that actor president did was name his dreams well...
It's really about wresting control of those satellites from the deep state and shadow government goons that are in place at the various spying agencies, as well as their pawns in the airforce. (Those military aircraft crashes a couple of months ago were no accident. The other branches of the military are loyal to their CIC, thankfully.)
I want to know who tried to take out POTUS with that unannounced missile launch no one wants to report on.
Does everyone go to the Navy when they need a boat?
When they need a big boy boat, yes, they do.
Go Thunderbirds! Isn't that illegal Mr. Frump?
You could pay for it by transferring all the space defense programs in the Navy, Air Force and Army to the new force. That'd be the revenue-neutral way; it wouldn't save any money and probably wouldn't work as well, but there you have it.
Or you could take the 85 billion increase in annual defense spending the administration has proposed and earmark it for the new force. But then the force doesn't have anything useful to do.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Mainly because, the Air Force, Navy and Army will continue to have satellites, and this will just add more. Take the air force for example. When the coast guard has to perform a search and rescue operation, do you think they call up the air force and ask to borrow a helicopter and a pilot? Do you think the Army does that? Navy? Marines? How about boats? Does everyone go to the Navy when they need a boat?
When the Army needs forward air cover, yes, they do indeed call the Navy for carrier based air support. If the Navy in turn needs strategic bombing, yes, they do indeed call the Air Force.
The point here is that now if any of them need satellite coverage, they would indeed call the Space Force (or whatever they call it).
If you think equal refers to size, you haven't thought it through very well.
Trumps' only motivation in anything he does is to feed his own ego. Everything else is secondary to that.
How exactly did you get from consolidating satellite and other space based services to electing a king in 1775?
Yes, I'm sure you want to believe that but facts are facts. He's activity did lead to the formal ending of the Korean War. The South Korean president stated that much. Recommended him for a Nobel Peace Prize I believe. Trump has directly met with the North Korean leader, something no other president could or would do.
If he was a 'war president' all he had to do is sit back and let everything continue as it was and eventually he would have had a war without lifting a finger.
Now what I've stated is simply fact, and nothing any one of you people with TDS can say will change it. With that, this will be the last thing I say in this thread about this subject. I'm not even going to come back and ready any replies. Simply, arguing with you people over it is not worth my time.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
Probably the creating an entire new chain of command (hopefully they can take the example of the Marines and share a Secretary) with all the civilian and military leaders involved.
Consolidation might give some benefits, then again creating the air force didn't seem to stop the other branches from managing their own aircraft...
I think he wants to start one with Canada instead ;)
I might point out that he in fact hasn't ended the Korean war. No peace treaty has been signed yet. In fact, nothing except a few very vaguely worded statements have come out of this yet. Let's see if North Korea really will give up their nukes. I'm not holding my breath.
Dammit, I miss Reagan. I didn't agree with him most of the time, but I could respect him. Today the conservatives in power seem to be mimeographed copies of copies of such that the end result is smudged and incoherent and totally unlike the original.
"Separate but equal" means one branch will be getting hand-me-down textbooks and asbestos infused ceilings.
That sounds like a fun MST3K episode, but we should have a cooler name. Like "Earth Team Tiger Squad" or "Flying Explosion Battle Brigade"
And war, war never changes.
Whichever nation is the first to militarize space will be able to drop rocks on any other launch facilities and maintain space dominance. Whoever controls space controls the planet. Collect and drop rocks from orbiting space stations or Lagrange point stations. Delta-v propulsion robots could change the orbit of asteroids between Mars and Jupiter to collide with enemies. We could mass produce such robots on a Ceres military base and have them seek out every asteroid in the belt around the right size to weaponize. Or a military base on the moon could launch rock after rock after rock at targets on earth as in The Moon is a Harsh Mistress.
Imagine say 50,000 weaponized asteroids in the belt just waiting for the right command. A hydrogen bomb can destroy a city, but a properly aimed asteroid or swarm of asteroids can destroy entire countries or even continents. It really is the next logical step for strategic weapons. Probably you'd want to get the orbits pretty close to earth so that you could change their orbits to collide with less notice. I could imagine entire wars fought solely from the asteroid belt. No need for soldiers or even armed robots on earth when you can just redirect asteroids from the belt and wait a few months. Coastal cities could be tsunamied. Conventional military forces would be no match for the elite space cadets in the space force.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
Hey, Marines work for the Navy... How do I know? You work for who pays you. The secretary of the Navy signs their paychecks just like mine and I worked for the Navy.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Trump absolutely escalated the situation, but the de-escalation is far below the "previous level".
The previous level included regular, albeit infrequent nuclear weapons tests and sabre rattling, which included rocks fired toward and even over Japan. The previous administration's response to all North Korean activity was to literally ignore it.
All of those tests were part of a program to get effective reliable Nukes and long range missiles.
They didn't stop the tests because Trump scared them, they stopped the tests because they got their Nukes and missiles working.
I'm not saying another President could have avoided that, but Trump's threats and bluster didn't avoid anything.
Trump, ignoring all of his inelegance, is the first US President to ever meet with a North Korean leader
Which has been a major NK objective forever. Something Trump should have gotten concessions for (recall the GOP scorn and outrage when Obama suggested he could meet without preconditions).
and, like it or not, he offered two very realistic outcomes to them:
1. Face annihilation in a war that they cannot hope to win with a people too starved to support a long war, let alone with the backing to do it (Kim didn't even fly on a North Korean plane to the meeting because they do not have one that can go that far!).
2. Open up and become a more traditional nation internationally, gaining the investment opportunities and thus money that that brings, while also giving up all nuclear ambitions, which should be easier since their testing site imploded.
That's a lot different than the "previous level".
It's the game NK has played forever, work on your Nukes and endure the rising tensions and sanctions. Then play nice and talk up peace and denuclearization in return for sanctions relief.
I'm sure the same thing will happen again, Kim will say all the right things and get whatever relief he can, up until he thinks his defensive capabilities are falling behind and then he'll start testing again.
I stole this Sig
Woah there cowboy... I think someone took one too many patented Infowars Brain Force Alpha Power Tabs this morning!
Not at all, he just wants the new Space Force to have to sit in the back of the bus and drink from its own water fountains.
May I suggest watching a little less Alex Jones?
Somehow, judging by a lot of the comments, the words “Separate but equal...” just flew right by you guys. His use of the phrase is, I feel, worthy of note and discussion. Also, without Congressional action, this is going to go precisely nowhere. Might as well call it FETCH, cuz it is not going to happen.
Our reign has gone on long enough. Indeed. Summon the meteors.
he also formally recognized Kim Jun Un's dictatorship as the legitimate ruler of N. Korea (something they'd been trying to get America to do for decades going back to when his dad was in charge) and made comments (largely ignored by the press) that he wants to see Americans stand in attention just like N. Koreans do for Kim; moving the Overton window substantially towards Authoritarianism in America.
He didn't return things to the previous level. He left them much, much worse.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
He's always wanted to be above all the other space cadets. Here's a picture from his youth.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
So now the Army, Navy, Air Force AND Space Force will all have satellites.
The wars of the future will not be fought on the battlefield or at sea. They will be fought in space, or possibly on top of a very tall mountain. In either case, most of the actual fighting will be done by small robots. And as you go forth today remember always your duty is clear: To build and maintain those robots.
The Air Force has cars, the Navy has cars, the Army has cars. Do you think we should be combining the management of these assets into one combined "Car Force"?
I find straw man arguments quite entertaining; keep up the good work.
One guy works for Google.
One guy works for Youtube.
They both ultimately get paid by Alphabet, but that doesn't mean the Youtube guy works for Google or vice versa.
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
Yes, I'm sure you want to believe that but facts are facts.
Facts are slippery things that can be turned around with ease.
He's activity did lead to the formal ending of the Korean War. The South Korean president stated that much.
Poor thingies you doesn't realize the Korean War has been over for decades. A treaty is meaningless. The South Korean president told Trump to shut the fuck up, and reminded him that there was no war, no reason to start a war, and begged him to stop playing games.
Recommended him for a Nobel Peace Prize I believe.
Sarcasm isn't your strong point, eh? Too bad you forgot your scorn for the Nobel prize when Obama won it as soon as the idea that Trump might get it was floated.
In reality, the Norwegians are hoping Trump dies so they can vote every other living person instead.
Trump has directly met with the North Korean leader, something no other president could or would do.
Good for them. Bad for the GOP that would have a collective shitfit had anybody else dared to suggest the idea, let alone one who promised a brutal dictator his love and affection.
Which Trump did, and suddenly the right-wing is ok with it.
If he was a 'war president' all he had to do is sit back and let everything continue as it was and eventually he would have had a war without lifting a finger.
Nope. He really tried to start a war, which is what he had to do since nobody else was going to fight. In fact, they were so disinterested, they literally told him to shut the fuck up in the Oval Office.
He still wants a war, of course. Probably Iran. Maybe Guam or Puerto Rico though.
Now what I've stated is simply fact, and nothing any one of you people with TDS can say will change it.
Yes, yes, your TRD is so strong you cannot be swayed, your mind is closed, and thus you praise Trump for winning the war with EastAsia.
All praise Trump. None shall disparage Trump and live.
With that, this will be the last thing I say in this thread about this subject. I'm not even going to come back and ready any replies.
Translation: you are making me uncomfortable so I will go to my safe space, close my eyes and ears, and pout.
Simply, arguing with you people over it is not worth my time.
Yes, your time would be better spent informing yourself.
And exactly which of those 17 articles do YOU think prohibits SDI, ballistic missiles which fly through space, and our hundreds of currently orbiting military satellites?
You did at least glance at what your own link says this time, before saying more dumb shit, right?
This is merely taking existing military space activities and consolidating them into a single, independent branch. Things like the GPS system, the large network of military satellites, communication networks, orbital asset and debris tracking, etc. This is an idea that's been debated for years prior to the Trump administration. The main reason is that people were concerned that the US Air Force was so focused on the traditional air superiority and strategic defense missions that they would not be able to properly focus on the space missions. Assets were also spread out among the different services. Therefore, instead of it being the second, less sexy job of an existing service, take all that into a single set of professionals focused on all things space.
The Air Force hates this idea of course, as it takes away their turf (budget, assets). However, the irony is that the Air Force was created under similar circumstances, when people argued that the US Army shouldn't be working space superiority and nuclear deterrence missions.
Russians did it like 15 years ago I believe.
What enemy will the space force fight? Rosewell creatures? Or perhaps Mars rover discovered bacteria in the soil and it is urgent to prepare for an interplanetary fight against them?
Keep up. Alex Jones (I bet you don't even know his former persona, whose death was faked) is a tool of the deep state.
True Patriots trust Q, Sessions, Kansas, POTUS, and The Plan.
This move must piss of so many people, quite a few with actual power. I guess the Donald is really, really desperate for some "good" news. But he need not worry, the fuckups will continue to cheer him onward, regardless of what stupid things he does. By now, the only reliable way to end his presidency is probably him nuking the worls, because the american nation has surely proven itself incapable of doing anything about this walking catastrophe.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
"The Enterprise is ready, sir." -- Scotty
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
The navy helped out at Fukushima, I think if we had a disaster on a similar scale they would help out the Coast Guard.
love is just extroverted narcissism
Hey, Marines work for the Navy... How do I know? You work for who pays you. The secretary of the Navy signs their paychecks just like mine and I worked for the Navy.
The Secretary is not in the Navy, he/she is a civilian with jurisdiction over the Navy, the Marines and at times the Coast Guard.
Reagan was serious, ...
Yes, he and his people really were (are). It was the opposition that tried to make a joke out of it.
We have big planes with missile-shooting lasers that work. The Navy is about to mount a large railgun turret on a destroyer. There are satellites that can skoot around and hit other satellites. There are some other things being tested, they just aren't mounted on a satellite, mostly becuse it is easier to test down here. 8-)
Found the Coastie! XD
The proper term, or more proper term, would be "uniformed services".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
There's a reason that non-combat services wear uniforms identical, or at least highly similar, to those of combat services. In a time of war these uniformed services will be called upon to support the military, in that capacity they must have a hierarchy and such that is compatible with the military to make communication easier. As an example consider a surgeon, or some other medical provider from USPHS, comes in to a room full of injured soldiers in various levels of need of treatment as well as military corpsman. This person is going to have to get everyone's attention, give orders, and the people receiving the orders will need to recognize this person's authority. Failure for this medical professional to command properly can mean soldiers die. One way to display this authority is to have such people wear a uniform consistent with the officers these soldiers deal with every day.
There is another reason to have these people wear military style uniforms. These people will travel in international waters and do things like take weather measurements, board ships that may carry the flag of another nation to provide care or perform an inspection of some sort, and so on. There are international laws, norms, and regulations that provide legal protections for people in uniform. Those not in uniform, and therefore not displaying the nation they represent in an obvious manner, may be considered a spy. Espionage is a big deal even in peacetime. No government likes employees of another government sneaking around in their business. A person with a flag of their nation on their shoulder, and insignia of some sort declaring their function (such as medical corps, climatologist, surveyor, border patrol, etc.) will be instantly recognized and treated appropriately. Even if these foreign nations do not share a language the symbols used to denote rank, occupation, nation, and so forth are generally universal enough to get much of the needed information across at a glance.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
What the Hell does this have to do with Reagan? He was a Conservative and a Republican. A real one.
By today's Republican standards Reagan would be a RINO.
Raise your Stargate universe with the Macross universe? Different media, same goal.
Where are the Zentradi when we need them? Humour me because it crossed my mind with a badly thought out Spacy.
Of course would love to have some popcorn when Washington finally gets what it has been asking for. Aliens with mecha that could put their lovely little military industrial complex to shame.
Aliens who have no problem with fighting, yet beaten quite badly by belting out a few tunes. Unless we wind up with the Marduk, then we're probably fucked again by their own songstresses buffing them up. Unless we happen to have the SDF-1 Macross park itself on the White House or Pentagon. That would be one hell of a redecoration for the place that loves to boast about muscle, yet doesn't care for peacemakers.
Pity the conservative warmonger that gets hoisted on his petard by being beaten badly with a beatitude.
Last time space exploration was about national security, we actually went to the moon. When the Cold War ended the space missions all but ended.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Please note that a significant majority did not vote for #45. We are as horrified as you are. Imagine you are seven years old, in the back seat of the family car. Dad is seriously drunk, talking about how great a driver he is, and it's beginning to snow and the road is freezing. Mom asking him to slow down is met with downshifts and wilder driving. Some hillbillies in a clapped out pickup truck next to him are racing with him and encouraging him. We are sorry, we hope to correct this error shortly.
It sounds like Hognoxious was channelling your POTUS with his incoherent & run-on ramblings, but that's just an outsiders view.
Listen to the others.
Copy us in Sweden.
For sure we'll out compete US with our great politics ... best growth in the world.. in completely useless SEK maybe.
It is required - by law - that the name of this organization always be pronounced: "SPAAAAACCCCCCE FOOOOORRRRRCCCCCE!"
Any other pronunciation would be criminalized.
Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
Rather than the US Space Force being a purely military organization, it would make sense to have a Space Force structured like, and with similar missions as, the US Coast Guard. As people and businesses move into space, we're going to NEED some sort of spaceborne Search and Rescue organization, perhaps with vessel inspection capabilities and missions. Perhaps the Space Force can be tasked with inspecting commercial spacecraft and satellites and ensuring that they aren't hiding military equipment.
And in the event of hostilities, the Space Force would, similar to the Coast Guard, become part of the Navy.
If you're too lazy to read the page you're linking to, at least read the URL itself that you copy/pasted. See that word right after ".org"? It says "nuclear-weapons". It doesn't say "military". Why? Because it doesn't ban military use of space. In fact, the treaty explicitly allows stationing military personnel in space. Anyway, here's a bit of what you would have found if you'd read the page before linking to it:
--
it does not prohibit missile-borne WMD from transiting space [ballistic missiles are space rockets] or weapons other than WMD being placed in space orbit and used to attack targets in space or on Earth.
There is no ban on air- ground, or conventional space-based anti-satellite or anti-missile weapons.
--
Not that I disagree with your conclusions (much), but ...
> don't gain much in utility over land based weapons and take up a lot of energy for initial launch
Conveniently, the keep that energy, as potential energy, and that energy can stored virtually forever before being converted into militarily effective energy by simply letting it fall. A simple, inert metal rod would deliver the same energy as a small atomic bomb. Flying at double-digit Mach numbers, it would hit the target very quickly, leaving little reaction time.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...
> It's just far easier to launch a big rocket from the surface and let it go ballistic to the target.
As you may know, intercontinental ballistic missiles fly through space anyway. So you have the same "energy for launch" and all. The question is "might it be better to have it halfway there ahead of time"? It reduces the warning time the target has by at least 10-15 minutes - minutes that they could spend launching missiles back at you. I say "at least" because an ICBM launch and flight is probably quite a bit easier to reliably detect than releasing a rod is.
> As I recall dropping something from orbit only shortens the time to target if it's already above the target when needed.
Since it starts out going roughly orbital speed, it won't drop straight down - not even close. If fired straight down, at 10,000 km/h, the orbital vector would mean it would circle the earth approximately once on its way down (air resistance makes this calculation difficult). You can fire from any location in orbit and have it hit anywhere you want on the plane, by adjusting the speed or angle at which you fire the de-orbit thrust.
> A nation like Russia or China would not only consider a geo-stationary weapons platform over their heads as provocative they might just find a way to arrange an "accidental" collision with one of their satellites to kill it
If Russia or China knew that the geo-stationary communication satellites above the US also contain tungsten rods aimed at them, they'd be pretty pissed. They don't know that those rods are on the satellites. I don't know that those rods AREN'T on the satellites.
We've been at the table with them many times. Insert yawn here.
I'll quote it for you.
The Coast Guard, established January 28, 1915, shall be a military service and a branch of the armed forces of the United States at all times.
Na, but I have a cousin who is, which is how I originally got schooled on this topic after making fun of him ;)
The coast guard is an armed active duty service by US federal statute that also has maritime law enforcement responsibilities.
We could have gotten to the exact same point where we are now without any of Trump's puerile rhetoric.
Coming to the table, one-on-one, appearing on the world stage as an equal, was exactly what Dear Leader wanted. The Great Negotiator gave him that in exchange for basically nothing.
Upon further reflection, strike the part about "it would circle the earth approximately once". It would be considerably less than full orbit, but easily several thousand miles. Of course, the satellite carrying the rod need not be in geosynchronous orbit. As I recall, ISS orbits the earth every 90 minutes, and many satellites are in similar orbits.
I believe US satellites overfly China many times per day. Which is those may have a tungsten rod or two tucked in amongst their other equipment I don't know. Probably none, but they're going 18,000 miles per hour, so I can't look at them with my telescope. They move much too fast.
He's activity did lead to the formal ending of the Korean War.
A peace treaty is being discussed. The formal ending comes when the treaty is signed.
Trump has directly met with the North Korean leader, something no other president could or would do.
No President was stupid enough to give the North Korean leader what he wanted and get nothing of substance in return.
Now what I've stated is simply fact [...] Simply, arguing with you people over it is not worth my time.
I bet you were brilliant on the high school debate team. We shall see whether you can resist the temptation to post more farcical inanities.
Nearly posted 'Starshit Troopers'. Do you want to know more?
On y va, qui mal y pense!
I doubt he had anything to do with the de-escalation. Kim is an asshole, but he is not an idiot. He did that.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
So actual science is a waste of millions by NASA when putting guns in space is fine. This guy...
and, like it or not, he offered two very realistic outcomes to them:
1. Face annihilation in a war that they cannot hope to win with a people too starved to support a long war, let alone with the backing to do it (Kim didn't even fly on a North Korean plane to the meeting because they do not have one that can go that far!).
2. Open up and become a more traditional nation internationally, gaining the investment opportunities and thus money that that brings, while also giving up all nuclear ambitions, which should be easier since their testing site imploded.
That's a lot different than the "previous level".
Sure, only if you ignore the several other previous levels that have happened before. We've heard it all before. Promises were made, vauge language was exchanged, the only difference is in the past no Americans saluted North Korean generals or praised dictators while telling their closest allies they have a "special place in hell".
Wait, it is a lot different than the "previous level". Along with not improving anything among enemies we've taken a major step backwards with allies. Hurrah!
I believe it is being named 'The Alan Parsons Project'.
The Air Force has cars, the Navy has cars, the Army has cars. Do you think we should be combining the management of these assets into one combined "Car Force"?
I find straw man arguments quite entertaining; keep up the good work.
No straws found in the grand parent post. It was right on target. Let me continue:
The army has air planes, the navy has air planes, the marines has air planes. Why are they not all in the air force?
Having another space force (on top of the existing one called NASA) would not eliminate the various military branches from having their own agendas and needs leading to overlap, thus arguing that because they have it there is a need is also pointless.
If the earth were a point mass with no atmosphere, then yes one would need cancel the orbital velocity in order to allow the object to simply fall.
The point mass approximation is important and useful because it's used for determining the orbit of orbiting bodies. It fails completely when you talk about de-orbit from LEO. IIS is 254 miles above the earth, which 8,000 miles across. Meaning from LEO earth is nothing like a far off point, it fills the entire downward side of your view, much like it does when you view the earth from 50 feet up. It's very much not a point mass. The illustrations in this xkcd make the point clear (the author is a former NASA physicist):
https://what-if.xkcd.com/58/
Having that out of the way, let's look at de-orbiting from LEO, which is orbit in the upper atmosphere (thermosphere). We know that in space, there is no air resistance, so if you fire a projectile it will keep going forever until it hits something. The range of a .22 gun, fired in space, is approximately infinite.
We also know that the lower the orbit, the faster it has to be, in order to move sideways fast enough to turn the downward fall into a arc around the mass. As you mentioned, to orbit at LEO, you have to go extremely fast. If you go a little too slow, you'll fall slightly, which will put you at an altitude which requires higher velocity for orbit. You'll then be even more deficient in orbital velocity for the lower orbit, which will cause you to fall faster, spiraling downward in a vicious cycle. In other words, getting to orbit is hard. If you fail to do the hard thing (orbit), you de-orbit. Meaning de-orbit is easy - just slow down a little bit and let gravity take make over.
Once you get to about 50-80 miles above the earth, you run into air resistance, which slows you pretty quickly. Remember the more your orbital speed is reduced, the faster you fall (technically, the more you fail to counteract the fall with sideways motion).
So from LEO at 254 miles, we can de-orbit in two different ways, or both at the same time. If we're used to thinking of the earth as a point mass, we can fire our projectile retrograde to slow it down a bit. That'll mean it's no longer at the correct orbital velocity, and will gradually spiral down. If we notice that earth's (denser) atmosphere is only 200 miles away, we can fire at it. US ships have guns that can fire *through air* sixty miles. Our pistol can fire a million miles through space. Traversing the 200 miles of space to get to air below isn't terribly difficult.
The army has air planes, the navy has air planes, the marines has air planes. Why are they not all in the air force?
I'll assume you're not being obtuse and answer your question: the flowchart for this is fairly straightforward...
For aircraft model X:
1) Does the Army have a mission specific need to directly support Army operations with this model? If yes, assign to Army use.
2) Does the Navy have a mission specific need to directly support Navy operations with this model? If yes, assign to Navy use.
3) In addition to yes or no to the above, does US military have a global strategic or battlefield operations need for this model outside of directly supporting Army and Navy operations and/or would answering yes to both above offer savings in consolidation? If yes, assign to Air Force.
Apply the above flowchart to satellite and other space based military assets with #3 being theoretical Space Force. If #3 has a significant number of Yes, consider creation of Space Force.
You're too tired to be outraged anymore? Why the the fuck do you think we have an opioid abuse problem? Suicide problems? People getting violent? You're just sitting there in whatever country you live in, comfy in your easy chair with your beer and snacks, watching the show; we're all living in this dystopian right-wing-Republican-Dominionist nightmare. It'll take decades to undo all the damage that's been done already, if can all be repaired at all -- and that's not even considering if somehow the sonofabitch manages to get re-elected!
The US already has a military agency doing space things. It is called NASA. The other military branches still felt the need to work around it. Adding another superflous branch of the government is just adding more bureacracy and graft.
Another attempt to sneak in an infinitely large, growing spy state based in near earth orbit
NASA has never been a military branch.
Abrogating treaties works both ways.
The secret space force and extraterrestrial presence has been known for years. Are they getting ready to acknowledge their presence? https://www.exopolitics.org/tr...
I see your definition of "fact" has been eroded, I wonder what the cause could be.
If he sat back and did nothing, there would be no war because that's the way it has been for the past 60 years.
"Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
He is preparing for the bugger invasion.
WTB [sig], PST!!!
Will they sit on their asses to wait a few hundred years until the debris de-orbits? Our first war in space will be our last one for a long, long time.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Traversing the 200 miles of space to get to air below isn't terribly difficult.
Of course not. But you still have 3 problems:
a) hitting something
b) preventing the projectile from melting up
c) keeping your "satellite" 'somewhere' at the same orbit
Thank you for the long post, but hint: I'm a physicist my self. Rods from sky are nice in SciFy, but no were close to reality.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
I guess the Army can get, and likely already has, a small "space force" of its own.
Well, there's the Army Space and Missile Defense Command.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
That that is is that that that that is not is not.
Space is much like air. You drop things from it that impact the ground.
To be more accurate, you can deorbit things, which is a lot more difficult than dropping things -- and that is referred to as kinetic bombardment.
But there is not a big push to develop this kind of capability; and that would not change if a space-centric branch of the military is created.
That that is is that that that that is not is not.
All due respect to the General.
Take off, every Hoser
There are many bases around the world where the military keeps weapons and people. The Air Force can bring long range bombers on target carrying conventional weapons. The Navy has carriers and submarines with conventional weapons positioned all around the world.
There are up to seven US carriers at sea at any given time, each carrying FA-18s with a combat radius of 380 miles. Some are enroute, some are near hot spots. That gives the US the ability to strike *those* few places quickly. At a top speed of around 35 mph, they don't go somewhere else very fast. http://www.businessinsider.com... Included in the carrier battle groups are those submarines you mentioned. There are more submarines, mostly Los Angeles class. They stay submerged for about seven weeks at a time, listening to low frequency command transmissions at a rate of twelve characters per hour. The Los Angeles class has a top speed of 23mph and carries carries Tomahawk cruise missiles with a range of 800-1500 miles. This covers a lot more area than the carrier groups. Air Expeditionary Groups can deploy with 48 hours.
I'm sure the 130 US and South Korean troops killed in active combat since the armistice started are happy to know that the war has been over for years.
Since its only the US I guess Australia has never taken action to prevent asylum seekers from Indonesia from entering their country. Offshore detention is just a myth? Are Australian detention centers concentration camps?
I'm not picking on Australia. They have a perfect right to control immigrants, just as the US does.
Is Greece running 'concentration camps' because they don't want to be overrun by economic refugees? They're actively processing people in their refugee camps and still it takes sometimes up to a year to decide whether someone is an actual refugee or just poor, because like under US law, just being poor is not a reason to give someone asylum. So are they running 'concentration camps'?
Not picking on Greece here because the European Union has the right to determine who they want to let into their borders
I'm just sick of people blaming the US because we don't have open borders either.
That was an interesting post, thank you.
Certainly the long range cruise missiles, such as the Tomahawk block IV with a range of 900 nautical miles, are a significant asset. That's what I always think of when people talk about military use of drones in an attack role - we've been using them heavily for a long, long time. The Tomahawk was developed in the 1970s. For attack, it's much better than a quadcopter in almost every conceivable way.
If this doesn't in some way resemble the Thunderbirds, I will be sad.
Since he can't get Faux News in every country, he's been watching Animated Documentaries on foreign cable.
We call them Cartoons.
Wait until he sees VOLTRON. He'll want a force of FIVE mini-lion robots that come together to make ONE GIANT ROBOT.