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,

[Nidi62]

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.

The "Space Force" thing is likely a reaction of a person with declining mental faculties (see the very name "Space Force" as an example) who is determined to put his name on things and is unable to understand the bureaucratic inefficiency, financial strain, duplication of effort, and wastefulness that creating another military branch would bring. Especially one as ill-defined and rudimentary technologically as space warfare/space combat. Leave it under the auspices of the Air Force until technological capability or operational necessity warrant it's own independent command structure.

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.

Joke's on them

[belthize]

We have a Space Farce so ha.

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.

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

[drinkypoo]

He asked intelligently, you failed to respond intelligently.

Point to the intelligent part of his comment. Even Trump's legal counsel has had to walk back from "no collusion" to "collusion is not a word in the code so it can't be a crime" which is, of course, a load of horse shit. We therefore know that there has been collusion, since they have shifted to attempting to justify it, and the only question is what the scope of the collusion was/is. Hence, anyone who has been paying attention knows that there was collusion. They claimed they were talking about adopting orphans, now they've admitted that was not the case, etc etc.

I can't tell the difference between someone with TDS and a paid writer on here,

I can't tell the difference between idiots who believe in TDS, and the paid writers they got the idea from, and neither can anyone else — especially when they post as AC. You could be anyone, including a sock puppet or a paid agitator, and you probably are.