Space: America's new war zone

[cal04]

The Bush administration has staked an aggressive new claim to dominate space - rejecting any new treaties that seek to limit the United States' extraterrestrial activities and warning that it will oppose any nations that try to get in its way.

A new policy recently signed by President George Bush, asserts that his country has the right to conduct whatever research, development and "other activities" in space that it deems necessary for its own national interests.

The new policy further warns that the US will take those actions necessary to protect its space capabilities "and deny, if necessary, adversaries the use of space capabilities hostile" to those interests. The document adds: "Space activities have improved life in the United States and around the world, enhancing security, protecting lives and the environment, speeding information flow serving as an engine for economic growth and revolutionising the way people view their world and the cosmos."

(snip)
"I think that saying we will not have any limits on our actions is quite dangerous," said Theresa Hitchens, director of the Washington-based Centre for Defence Information.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article1902195.ece

[BushOut06]

1. So, what exactly are we going to do?

If an "unfriendly" nation decides to launch a satellite into orbit, are we going to blast it out of the sky? And what god gave the United States exclusive domain over outer space?

If some country places a nuclear missile platform in orbit over the US, we can deal with that at the appropriate time. Anything short of that, fuck off. We have spy satellites over other countries, I imagine Russia has spy satellites over ours.

Figures that Bush would have to stick his nose in this.

[TheMadMonk]

2. Forget survial as a species. Consider survival of the planet.

George Bush has (for all the wrong reasons) managed to get at least one thing right. A strong, flourishing Western presence in space is a must.

Keeping this planet in a recognisable shape and our own probable survival as a species requires that sooner, better than later, we need to focus our energies on exploiting space for necessary resources. One thing many of us, (even greens) are not aware of is that there is not enough platinum available to us on this planet to support a hydrogen economy. Tantalum, an element essential in compact electronics comes from only a few places in the world and IIRC the best/biggest is right in the middle of the Congo conflict. Copper, silver and gold, also essential in electronics are also rapidly becoming scarcer commodities even as demand increases. Already several resources necessary to our accustomed way of living are in short suppy and the list will only continue to grow.

The conflicts in the ME are only the first in a series of conflicts which will later be looked back on as the "Oil Wars", and "Resource Wars" how severe they get will depend on how quickly we move past scrapping over scraps. And what gets spent "protecting" resorce sources simply eats into the dwindling supply parasitically.

Oil is primarily equivalent to energy and there are doable alternatives no further away than the middle distance. Eliminate it from the energy equation and its status falls back to that of important industrial precursor material.

Same with coal.

Other consumables are not so easily replaced. But they can be sourced elsewhere with the right will. And to the best of my knowledge, worst case estimates of costs of reaching break even, fall far short of the US militrary budget for just one year.


On the political landscape, China is aiming towards a (permanent IIRC) presence on the Moon in the not too distant future.

Read into that whay you will.

[Briar]

3. What the US wants

is the ability to rain down death on anyone who dares to challenge its interests. It already imagines it has the right to do so - hence its contempt for all international law, convention and organisations. This is a terrifying article.