US Warns on Russia's New Space Weapons (reuters.com)

The United States voiced deep suspicion on Tuesday over Russia's pursuit of new space weapons, including a mobile laser system to destroy satellites in space, and the launch of a new inspector satellite which was acting in an "abnormal" way. From a report: Russia's pursuit of counterspace capabilities was "disturbing," Yleem D.S. Poblete, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Arms Control, Verification and Compliance, told the U.N.'s Conference on Disarmament which is discussing a new treaty to prevent an arms race in outer space. A Russian delegate at the conference dismissed Poblete's remarks as unfounded and slanderous. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, at the Geneva forum in February, said a priority was to prevent an arms race in outer space, in line with Russia's joint draft treaty with China presented a decade ago.

Comments

Oh,

[msauve]

While you're at it, please ignore our new Space Force.

Re:Oh,

[bobbied]

While you're at it, please ignore our new Space Force.

You do understand that the "Space Force" thing is likely a reaction to this kind of activity from the Russians and Chinese right? As campy as it sounds, it sure seems like an idea who's time has long since come.

Re:Oh,

[drinkypoo]

The Space Force is more an attempt to separate out programs from the Air Force that have been killing their budget the past decade or more. Whether it is wise or not is debatable, but to automatically declare sinister motives is silly.

There's no good reason to move that stuff out of the Air Force at this time, because it is a small amount of activity compared to the whole. The only reason you might want to move that stuff into its own force is so that you can handicap it. Trump works for Putin, who would very much like to see our ability to manage military interests in space impaired...

Re:Oh,

[drinkypoo]

The political pull to the left is strong with this one... Why must you see collusion and conspiracy around every corner?

Because I'm paying attention.

I see good reasons to move this function away from the Air Force,

Name one.

Re:Oh,

[Anonymous Coward]

Trump just wants to go down in history as the guy who created the Space Force and guarantee having spaceships named after him.

Why wait. Start naming them now. USS Shithole

USS Bonespurs

USS Draft Dodger

USS Grab 'em by the pussy

USS KKK

USS Stormy Daniels

USS Karen McDougal

I could go on....

Re:Oh,

[Nidi62]

Interesting issue you bring up, but you need to divorce yourself from the political considerations on this.

There are reasons to create a new branch of the armed services that go beyond costs. The mission and budget of the Air Force is quite big, as is their command structure. Carving out a new branch, much like the carving out the Army Air Corps, does have it's advantages. Flattening the command structure allows more flexibility and faster response times, allows for specialized training and skills to be closer to the top of the command structure, and allows for focusing appropriated budget and resources on specific areas of the mission.

Of course, there is a down side to everything. But in my opinion this idea has merit. It flattens the hierarchy at the Pentagon, allows the development and advancement of resources with specialized skills. And creates a sharper focus on a specific problem set. Rockets and satellites go one way, things that depend on wings go another. It's a natural division and there is very little overlap, so it actually makes sense to me.

Remember what happens when you flatten something: it gets wider. Have space forces be a subsidiary command of the Air Force makes sense right now because the technology simply isn't mature enough to warrant in independent command. As an independent command you add senior command staff at the political level (think White House/Pentagon) and the support staff that goes with it, scientific staff, support and logistical staff, training facilities for both basic and advanced training, OCS/academy locations, etc. So you are either relying on contractors for staffing (very expensive but politically attractive) or robbing from other branches/setting up your own training pipeline or manpower pool.

Keep it as part of the Air Force and you keep the vertical efficiency the Air Force already has. Pull from Air Force enlisted and officer recruits or existing unit, rely on the technological and institutional knowledge the Air Force already has from decades of cooperation with NASA and working on Star Wars, X-37, etc. Until it reaches a critical mass it is too inefficient and expensive to have it operating by itself.

Re:Oh,

[Nidi62]

Sailors are not generally trained, organized, equipped, or doctrinally inculcated to serve as 'soldiers'. Likewise 'soldiers' are not generally trained, organized, equipped, or doctrinally inculcated to serve aboard ship, perform amphibious operations, or participate in naval expeditionary campaigns. Because of this the Marines exist.

Exactly my point. The Marines serve a very niche, specialized, and important role. But, that role is not large enough to warrant it's own, independent branch. The Marines rely on the Navy for medical, logistical, and even training support (Naval Academy for Marine officers), and the Navy uses Marines for certain functions as well, such as guarding conventional and nuclear weapons aboard ship. If anything, the Space Force should have a Marine-Navy relationship until it grows too large or becomes operationally necessary to be independent. At that point it would have organically grown most of the logistical and command structure necessary to be an independent branch, making for a relatively easy transition. Right now, it's just forced.

Not a Russia appologist but really?

[DarkOx]

With the US creating a whole new military branch (or at least the executive trying to) why would be surprised other quasi hostile nations with the capability of doing so would NOT be preparing space based counter measures?

Space Force aside what did people think was going to happen everyone was just going to play nice and abide by already 40 year old treaties to not put more than 10 warheads on an ICBM for all eternity?

Time marches on folks - technology improves.

Re:What did you think would happen?

[Train0987]

The US star wars program was the final nail in the communist Soviet Bloc's coffin. Money well spent even if it were "fake" (which it's not).

Re:What did you think would happen?

[bobbied]

It was neither fake nor about this kind of thing. It was a missile defense system. And it actually developed into multiple working weapons systems. Patriot missile systems are one example, and there are more.

However, one cannot deny that the prospect of such a system was partially responsible for the fall of the Soviet Union as they economically couldn't manage the R&D work required to "keep up" with all that was going on. They tried, but it only hastened their economic collapse. So, Star Wars actually was successful as a strategy, even if it didn't produce a weapon system that achieved all it's stated goals. It was pretty good propaganda if nothing else.

No, you can't answer him, you have TDS

[Anonymous Coward]

He asked intelligently, you failed to respond intelligently.

I can't tell the difference between someone with TDS and a paid writer on here, assuming you're the former - get a grip, you're acting like TDS has shut down your reasoning centres.