Thursday, November 06, 2003
9:57 pm
Onwards and Upwards
On a related note, here is a report from the Center for Defense Information on the weaponisation of space. At this point in time, the militarisation of space continues apace with ten nations having a military capacity and forty nations with the potential to do so, through their current civil capability. The dominance of the United States is awesome: they account for 95% of all military space expenditure and have 110 military operational satellites compared to 40 for Russia and 20 for the rest of the world combined. (One should note that this includes the Global Positioning System).
There is an incentive for the United States to adopt offensive weapon systems in space to protect its military assets and the United States Air Force Space Command's most recent plan has earmarked their deployment in the timeframe 2016-2028.
The report examines the case for whether other countries have the capability of deploying space-based weaponsry, the most promising of which are micro-satellites that can attack and disable existing satellites. There have been statements by some nations, notably China and India, that they are working towards these capabilities but these are considered to be rhetorical flourishes.
Apart from the United States, every other country favours a diplomatic prohibition on space weaponry in order to hobble US supremacy in this area. The other drawback for dependence on space systems is that they are vulnerable to a 'scorched orbit' strategy by a desperate enemy using a low yield nuclear warhead in a low earth orbit or payloads of granular particles.
(6th November 2003, 21.56)
On a related note, here is a report from the Center for Defense Information on the weaponisation of space. At this point in time, the militarisation of space continues apace with ten nations having a military capacity and forty nations with the potential to do so, through their current civil capability. The dominance of the United States is awesome: they account for 95% of all military space expenditure and have 110 military operational satellites compared to 40 for Russia and 20 for the rest of the world combined. (One should note that this includes the Global Positioning System).
There is an incentive for the United States to adopt offensive weapon systems in space to protect its military assets and the United States Air Force Space Command's most recent plan has earmarked their deployment in the timeframe 2016-2028.
The report examines the case for whether other countries have the capability of deploying space-based weaponsry, the most promising of which are micro-satellites that can attack and disable existing satellites. There have been statements by some nations, notably China and India, that they are working towards these capabilities but these are considered to be rhetorical flourishes.
Apart from the United States, every other country favours a diplomatic prohibition on space weaponry in order to hobble US supremacy in this area. The other drawback for dependence on space systems is that they are vulnerable to a 'scorched orbit' strategy by a desperate enemy using a low yield nuclear warhead in a low earth orbit or payloads of granular particles.
(6th November 2003, 21.56)
Links
- Ishtar Talking
- Korea Life Blog
- Toothing
- Academic Secret
- Genius Duck
- Hairstyles and Nails
- Home Tips
- Health Talk and You
- Beadle Beads
- Glass Beads Supplies
- Paquet Full of Glass
- Native American Jewelry
- Blogopoly
- Second String Swap
- Work at Home News
- Bashhh
- Click Here
- Click Here
- Just Another Opinion Blog
- Dip Dot
- Awryt
- Zacquisha
Blog Archive
-
▼
2003
(696)
-
▼
November
(33)
- Blair Out George Galloway's new way, hoping to un...
- Compromised Initial indications show that the mee...
- The House of the Result of the Result Donald Rums...
- Blair's Bluster I must admit that I thought the s...
- Rowing the boat back upstream to Nice At first, t...
- Square Wheels President Chirac, Prime Minister Ra...
- Al-Qaeda: Conspiracy, Network or Ideology? Al-Qae...
- In areas where it counts This is an old report fr...
- No title
- Hadrian and the Neo-Cons Not a particularly bad b...
- Eastern Promise Another small straw in the wind o...
- Right Now Article on the Neo-conservatives.
- Visions of the Future Although assumptions that d...
- So that's what Portillo was offered The shadow ca...
- Cuts masquerading as 'flexibility' Lord Bach, Min...
- This one will hit paydirt This is one lawsuit tha...
- Fading Horizons What do you say when arch-federal...
- Self Delivering Leaflets A new technological brea...
- Onwards and Upwards On a related note, here is a ...
- Rivals An article in the Christian Science Monito...
- Michael Howard and the Conservative Party: Dracula...
- I thought this would be on Slugger as it is one of...
- Blair waffles on about the European Constitution: ...
- Basra appears to be one city that is stable and en...
- A British marine was shot dead in a covert operati...
- US Bases and Lost Property Another ally of the Un...
- Banned Snow White and the Seven Asylum Seekers ha...
- Side-effects of the Constitution The European Con...
- Brian Micklethwaite recently posted about Blair's ...
- Michael Howard and Europe On Sean Gabb's candidli...
- Gibraltar Precedent It came too late for the Chag...
- Why the EU is (becoming) a modern state Whenever ...
- Does Gibraltar really want to be part of the EU? ...
-
▼
November
(33)
0 comments:
Post a Comment