The US Military is Now Talking Openly About Going On the Attack in Space 106
The U.S. military has begun openly discussing offensive capabilities in space, reports ArsTechnica, a significant shift from previous policies that avoided mentioning space-based weapons to prevent an arms race. U.S. Space Command recently listed "integrated space fires" -- military terminology for offensive or defensive actions against adversaries -- among its priorities.
The move follows increasing concerns about China and Russia's space warfare capabilities, including satellite-disabling weapons and potential nuclear anti-satellite systems. "Space is a war-fighting domain," Space Force Chief Gen. Chance Saltzman said at a conference in Orlando. "Ten years ago, I couldn't say that." Gen. Stephen Whiting, head of U.S. Space Command, identified "integrated space fires" as his organization's most urgent requirement. The capabilities under consideration range from cyberattacks and directed energy weapons to satellite-capture systems, though specific details remain classified.
The move follows increasing concerns about China and Russia's space warfare capabilities, including satellite-disabling weapons and potential nuclear anti-satellite systems. "Space is a war-fighting domain," Space Force Chief Gen. Chance Saltzman said at a conference in Orlando. "Ten years ago, I couldn't say that." Gen. Stephen Whiting, head of U.S. Space Command, identified "integrated space fires" as his organization's most urgent requirement. The capabilities under consideration range from cyberattacks and directed energy weapons to satellite-capture systems, though specific details remain classified.
Race to the bottom of stupidity (Score:3, Insightful)
just stop!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
These people cannot. "Stupid" is all they have.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Russia's already orbiting nukes. If they start whacking our satellites we need a way to fight back.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Race to the bottom of stupidity (Score:4, Informative)
Russia's already orbiting nukes.
No, they're not.
It's possible that they may be developing an orbital nuclear weapon, but no, they don't have one now.
https://www.airandspaceforces.... [airandspaceforces.com]
https://www.vox.com/world-poli... [vox.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Oh, by all the gods, they developed orbital nuclear weapons in the 1970s, several were built at Oak Ridge. I'm sure the Soviets did the same, and Japan and India had almost certainly figured out how to do it. Construction-wise it's not that different than the nuclear howitzer shells that were built in the thousands, with a maneuvering unit attached and a reentry shell. My understanding is that their radioactivity signature was indiscernible from a big RTG. No idea if any were ever launched, but since th
Re: (Score:2)
OK, yeah, sure, everybody had orbital weapons back in the 70s.
Re: (Score:2)
Can you come up with any reason why that was somehow unlikely, or for that matter any reason why it would not be inevitable? Just because it was a stupid idea and a waste of money certainly wouldn't have been an impediment to either the Pentagon or the Kremlin. The prospect of being able to deliver a nuke to the other's capital in minutes (depending on where it was in its orbit) would have had the generals salivating.
In the early '80s I met the former master sergeant who had been in charge of security for
Re: (Score:2)
Can you come up with any reason why that was somehow unlikely,
Because in fact nuclear weapons were not put into orbit in the 1970s.
They were discussed, but it didn't happen.
Re: (Score:2)
And you know this how? Wikipedia says so?
Re: (Score:3)
so far the closest is you said
No idea if any were ever launched
which I consider very weak support for the assertion "Russia's already orbiting nukes."
Re: Race to the bottom of stupidity (Score:2)
Which I never said.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
https://slashdot.org/comments.... [slashdot.org]
Sentence five, first seven words.
Re: (Score:2)
You mean where I said, "No idea if any were ever launched"???
Re: (Score:2)
Oh yeah, I get it now. This must be me, over here -> https://news.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org]
Re: Race to the bottom of stupidity (Score:2)
No this is totally right. It is just in the math. Mach 2 and big going up, Mach 15 tiny and invisible going down. Which can be shot down by defensive missiles? Anyone old enough to remember Reagans Star Wars or SDI? What would that actually be? Would it actually be lasers and light sabers in space, like Israels iron dome is made out of, or something else? Hmmm.
Re:Race to the bottom of stupidity (Score:5, Insightful)
And, it’s not like an orbital nuke would be any sort of game changer. As it stands the major nuclear powers can wipe any city off the map in 30 minutes using old-timey ICBMs from the 1970s.
Re: Race to the bottom of stupidity (Score:3)
Both Russia and China have demonstrated the ability to use direct-ascent anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons. China tested an ASAT weapon in January 2007, destroying a defunct Chinese weather satellite and creating a debris field of more than 3,000 pieces of space debris.
Sometimes when I think we're all doomed, I fantasize about how the only real long-term solution is get
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Need proof? The US just reelected a felon to the highest office in the land, and many of them still reject climate change. It remains to be seen if this is enough to phase them, but if not, the inability to access space because of debris won't phase them at all. (And the climate stuff isn't looking too good, given all of the unusual hurricanes and droughts plaguing
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't know about you, but that tells me quite a bit about what the voters thought of his opponent.
Re: (Score:2)
The 'Lesser Evil' (whichever candidate you believe that to be) was finally just too damn evil to vote for, millions sat the process out in disgust.
Re: Race to the bottom of stupidity (Score:2)
If you don't vote, one will be provided for you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Both candidates vowed to continue using our tax dollars to provide funding and weapons to enable Israel to exterminate any Palestinians who didn't (or couldn't) flee. If you don't refer to endorsing genocide as "evil" then what do you call it?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
blame the US for Japanese casualties
Considering that the US fire bombed cities with no strategic or military value, specifically to cause civilian casualties, in the vague hope that maybe it would cause them to somehow throw out the government and sue for peace, yeah. Not all of course, they did attack plenty of legitimate military targets, but like in Germany a lot of the deaths were utterly unnecessary and militarily senseless.
Israel is deliberately massacring civilians and not even pretending any longer that it's anything else. Snipers a
Re: (Score:2)
Israel is deliberately massacring civilians and not even pretending any longer that it's anything else. Snipers are shooting toddlers in the head and luring people into range by playing recordings of children screaming for help
I'm sure you have an unimpeachable source for this claim we would all like to see.
Re: (Score:2)
The IDF troops are posting videos of their atrocities on Telegram, for the god's own sake. Where in the world have you been?
Re: (Score:2)
Where have i been? Not on telegram. Perhaps you could find a source we could all see to back up your claim?
Re: (Score:1)
Trump won the election, and I got threatened with termination. My own brother told me he was cutting me off, saying he would let the house I was renting go into foreclosure. Not sure in what manner I have offended. I got a promotion immediately before being threatened with termination, and I hadn't long
Re: Race to the bottom of stupidity (Score:4, Informative)
Maybe he is a shrewd businessman and negotiator, but he's definitely an asshole with a list of character and criminal defects who has no problem commiserating with white supremacists, Christian nationalists, and sexual predators, as long as they claim to be loyal to him. He's already backtracking on campaign promises like lowering grocery prices, lying about getting Mexico to "close its border", consistently backs fossil fuels even though they keep getting more expensive while renewables keep getting cheaper, and somehow still doesn't understand how tariffs work. I don't know how you missed all of this, but your brother didn't.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Which opponent? I mean, Cthulhu lost again, and I was sorely disappointed. The greater evil should always win.
Honestly, from people I talked to that voted Trump, their only issue was Trump promising to lower prices and create a better economy. Now he is backpedaling on his promise of lower prices, and he'll add tariffs that will cause inflation - good going US voters, you guys know best.
Re: Race to the bottom of stupidity (Score:2)
Imagine thinking winning at all costs says more about your opponent than yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I read that efforts to develop anti satellite lasers are progressing. No debris, the thing just stops working and maybe loses attitude control.
Re: (Score:2)
In the 1970s the CIA claimed that Russia had blinded one of its satellites with a ground-based laser. Turned out that they had accidentally aimed the thing at a particularly intense Siberian forest fire, but the event apparently prompted both sides to build such a thing. Today blinding any satellite from the ground is almost trivially easy (if you have deep pockets). It amazes me that the Ukrainians haven't done it yet.
Re: (Score:2)
I donâ(TM)t remember when, but it was a really long time ago that we shot down a satellite with a missile launched from the ground, just in order to flex.
China launched a missile from the ground to demonstrate that they could shoot a satellite down. The USA launched a missile from a floating platform, a common destroyer, and shot down a satellite in response.
Just a deterrence measure (Score:3)
This is just deterrence which prevents the stupidity that is war. If countries start to think we dont have any teeth in space they might try something. China and Russia have been flexing quite a lot in space recently, they need to be aware that we have our own toys in this potential sphere of conflict.
Remember, not a single person will die because of these statements made by our military.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
If that's what they're doing they're incredibly incompetent at it. So far both sides combined have killed fewer civilians in Ukraine than the US killed just in Fallujah.
https://www.statista.com/stati... [statista.com]
OHCHR has estimated the number of deaths of civilians, or non-armed individuals, in Ukraine at 12,162 since the start of the war on February 24, 2022.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
LOL, Russia has wanted to genocide Ukraine ever since they successfully killed off Circassia using genocidal tactics. During the Holodomor they used starvation, refusing US food aid. Ethnic cleansing is what Russia is all about. Wait, we were talking about America making them do it?
Re: (Score:3)
China and Russia are both openly expansionist powers. China claims not only large portions of international waters but also ocean territory belonging to most surrounding countries and Russia is currently occupying territory belonging to both Ukraine and Georgia. If you think that would go away without the US you're a fool.
Re: (Score:1)
China claims not only large portions of international waters but also ocean territory belonging to most surrounding countries
And not just one China - both of them at the same time!
According to the ROC (Taiwan) Ministry of Foreign Affairs...
The South China Sea Islands are part of the territory of the Republic of China. That the ROC is entitled to all rights over the South China Sea Islands and their relevant waters in accordance with international law and the law of the sea is beyond dispute.
https://en.mofa.gov.tw/theme.a... [mofa.gov.tw]
Recognizing Taiwan's independence doesn't mean that claim will disappear.
Re: (Score:1)
"Remember, not a single person will die because of these statements made by our military."
A good point.
Reminds me of some woo podcast I stumbled on one time.
They said that speech is "karmically cheaper" than actual action.
And thus, evil people will use speech to influence others to do the dirty work for them.
Regardless of actual belief in this kind of thing, I found this to be a very interesting concept.
Re: (Score:2)
Heh, deterring openly expansionist powers like Russia and China from attacking other countries is hardly evil.
Just a reminder: (Score:5, Interesting)
The last time we openly talked about space weapons, the USSR went bankrupt trying to compete with what we were rumored to have in development.
There is a value to such talk.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The last time we openly talked about space weapons, the USSR went bankrupt trying to compete with what we were rumored to have in development.
The USSR went bankrupt fighting a war in Afghanistan. The people who were around at the time pretty much all agree that, after some initial panic, the Soviets concluded that Reagan's SDI would not be able to shoot down a massive attack, and considered it an idle threat.
As for war in space, we have a lot more to lose than we have to gain-- the US is heavily dependent on space systems. Given that it's much easier to destroy things than to launch things, with war in space everyone loses.
Re:Just a reminder: (Score:4, Interesting)
> The USSR went bankrupt fighting a war in Afghanistan.
If so, Putin's not learning from history. The Russian economy can't be propped up via financial fudging forever. Putin's probably gambling Ukraine will run out of soldiers before Russia's economy collapses. It's a big game of chicken.
Re: (Score:3)
But, here’s the kicker - it’s not like their financial situation will be much different if they win or lose. Ukraine isn’t any sort of financial prize. Putin h
Re:Just a reminder: (Score:5, Insightful)
Ukraine isn't any sort of financial prize.
Food. Ukraine produces lots of food. They export most of the grains that Europe eats. If Putin controls Ukraine, he controls Europe's food supply -and ensures Russia's food supply.
Re: (Score:1)
> Ukraine...export most of the grains that Europe eats. If Putin controls Ukraine, he controls Europe's food supply
It'll be mine-flavored if he "wins".
Re: (Score:3)
So now the conspiracy theory is that the USA mind-controlled Russian soldiers into invading Ukraine?
Re: (Score:3)
That's the standard line they've been feeding everyone:
"They Made Me Do It". A familiar refrane from wife-beaters everywhere.
Re: (Score:1)
As long as you like living under the boot of the Muscovite Midget.
Seems any country given the choice chooses not to...I wonder why...
But I'm sue it's Obama's fault Russia likes invading and murdering everyone.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ukraine isn't any sort of financial prize.
Food. Ukraine produces lots of food. They export most of the grains that Europe eats. If Putin controls Ukraine, he controls Europe's food supply -and ensures Russia's food supply.
I would imagine farming is quite the (impossible?) challenge in an active war zone. Doubly so when all the farmers were turned into fighters years ago. With expected losses at this point.
If Ukraine were such a food powerhouse, don’t you think the human populated area known as Europe would have felt that by now? We’re coming up on a three-year old conflict here. Forget the land. How many farmers are still alive producing?
Either there’s been significant measurable impact to food product
Re: (Score:2)
Last year Ukraine still produced 40-50% (varies by type) of the grain Europe imported. While actively fighting a war on their own soil.
Their contribution to feeding Europe is huge.
That is incorrect. Ukraine export are minimal toEU (Score:2)
undoing my modding, because that is the stupidest thing I ever heard and easily shown wrong with basic google skills.
https://www.statista.com/stati... [statista.com] 7-12 billions dollar export to EU is nothing, the total food market in EU is like 230 billions that's not even 5% in previous decade, only reached 5% when propping them up, EU produce 300 millions tons cereals https://agridata.ec.europa.eu/... [europa.eu] , and it is exporting a few 10 millions tons and is a NET EXPORTER
Re: (Score:2)
Google disagrees with you:
Nope (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> The USSR went bankrupt fighting a war in Afghanistan.
If so, Putin's not learning from history. The Russian economy can't be propped up via financial fudging forever. Putin's probably gambling Ukraine will run out of soldiers before Russia's economy collapses. It's a big game of chicken.
The USSR went bankrupt in the late 1940s when Stalin insisted on making more tanks and planes than fixing civilian infrastructure. It just took 45 more years for this bear fruit enough to collapse.
Japan and Western Europe rebuilt their economies over building new weapons.
However as long as fudging the books keeps working for another 10-15 years, it'll work for Putin... A lesson that the US may also be learning very soon.
Re: (Score:2)
The value would be the USA going bankrupt, right comrade?
And the Soviet Union did not go bankrupt trying to complete with Reagan's moronic project.
Re: (Score:2)
The Soviet Union did not go bankrupt trying to complete with Reagan's moronic project.
A couple of posts have said this.
Can you cite an analysis paper we could read that explains this? Something from the cIA or from a military think tank? I am sure such must exist, whatever the conclusions.
Besides Russian nuclear investments, such an analysis must include competing motivations for alternate pursuits such as strategic ground campaigns.
It seems unlikely to me that SDI had no effect on the Russian economy.
Re: (Score:3)
It seems unlikely to me that SDI had no effect on the Russian economy.
Why does that "seem unlikely"? It was pretty clear that responding to the SDI by simply building more missiles and overwhelming the defenses. Do keep in mind the one missile of that era carried ten warheads, but could easily carry carry twenty or more dummy warheads indistinguishable from real ones, each of which needs to be shot down, and that each defending missile is as expensive, and plausibly more expensive, than the ICBMs that the Soviet Union was capable of churning out on a mass-production factory
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
he USSR went bankrupt trying to compete
That is the mythology but it is doubtful. There were a lot of things that contributed to the collapse of the Soviet Union. One alternative explanation is that it was the arms race which held the soviet block together. When Gorbachev and Reagan agreed in 1985 that the arms race wasn't winnable by either side, the central purpose of the Warsaw pact and then the Soviet Union disappeared. Without the threat of the West the internal divisions exploded each in turn.
I think people forget that one side's "deterren
The United States of SPACE! (Score:1)
M - A - R - S. Red rocks! Yay yayyyy!
the star gate is not in space oops said to much! (Score:2)
the star gate is not in space oops said to much!
Star Wars (Score:2)
Yes I get it, Star Wars is obvious. And they aren't wrong that war will be fought in space at some point. But seems like a pretty damning indictment of human culture in general that warfare tops the list of what we want to do in every new endeavor, be it on land, in the ocean, or in space. Pretty immature and petty of us all really. Recently the head of NATO talked about moving NATO to be more focused on war, which does seem inevitable but how tragic and wasteful.
Re: Star Wars (Score:2)
Space junk (Score:2)
Let's hope the Space Force is preparing to deal with orbital debris clouds that may threaten the structural integrity of anything in orbit or that we hope to put in orbit in the future.
Re: (Score:2)
The Space Farce already has a budget 20% larger than NASA and to date hasn't accomplished anything other than make some consulting companies quite wealthy.
Footfall (Score:3)
I think I'll go and read "Footfall" (Niven/Pournelle) again, to refresh my space battle tactics.
Project Orion, shuttles armed with missiles, fission-pumped x-ray lasers, it's a helluva ride.
Dr Evil Says (Score:3)
I want a frickin SpaceX StarShip with lasers!!!!
woof, woof woof woof woof (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Humanity's M.O. since 3 million years. Good luck removing that glitch.
Re: (Score:2)
Costa Rica disbanded its military in the 1940s, and as a consequence is the only country in Latin America that hasn't suffered a military coup in the last 75 years.
Yeah, whatever (Score:3)
They're talking about it PUBLICLY now.
In all liklihood, space has been weaponized for quite a long time by now.
Ok, and? (Score:1)
Our enemies will surely attack us through space, if they can.
"But ... spaaace!" is not a replacement for capabilities and deterrents.
Re: (Score:2)
Trump visits Uranus daily.