I forgot about that. we are just returning the favor. and trying to make it seem like the "safe" thing to do.
sheeple are so stupid.
"this is a waste of cyberspace."
your prick-ful, condescending, conceited contribution to this thread is ... wasted. tsk tsk.
Hey Aggie, can't refute my dissent, so boutons in anti-Amerika. yawn
what china did and the u.s. is going to do are different... boutons, where do you live for real?... tell us which taliban cave you're posting from...
Clanny, go yourself
http://www.reuters.com/article/domes...45129720080216
Looks like some of us may have been on the right track.Russia says U.S. may use satellite blast as test
MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia's Defence Ministry said on Saturday a U.S. plan to shoot down an ailing spy satellite could be used as a cover to test a new space weapon.
The ministry said there was insufficient proof that Washington's decision to fire a missile at the disabled satellite was to prevent a potentially deadly leak of toxic gas as it re-entered Earth's atmosphere.
"In our opinion, the decision to destroy the U.S. satellite is not as harmless as it is being presented. Especially as the United States has been avoiding talks on restricting a space arms race for quite a long time," the ministry's information department said in a statement.
"Under cover of discussions about the danger posed by the satellite, preparation is going ahead for tests of an anti-satellite weapon. Such tests mean in essence the creation of a new strategic weapon."
U.S. officials said on Thursday that President George W. Bush had decided to have the Navy shoot the 5,000-pound (2,270 kg) satellite with a modified tactical missile after security advisers suggested its re-entry could lead to a loss of life.
Some space and security experts have said they did not believe Washington's justification for the plans and argued the Pentagon was more likely testing its ability to target other states' satellites.
This suggestion is rejected by U.S. officials.
It will be the first time the United States has conducted an anti-satellite operation since the 1980s. Russia also has not conducted anti-satellite activities in 20 years.
(Reporting by Tanya Mosolova)
How can I refute your dissent? You're an idiot.
Lamarcus:
U.S. officials said on Thursday that President George W. Bush had decided to have the Navy shoot the 5,000-pound (2,270 kg) satellite with a modified tactical missile after security advisers suggested its re-entry could lead to a loss of life.What is so hard to understand about this? If it falls in a civilized area, you're going to have to worry about the debris killing people, on top of any chemicals on board.The ministry said there was insufficient proof that Washington's decision to fire a missile at the disabled satellite was to prevent a potentially deadly leak of toxic gas as it re-entered Earth's atmosphere.
Who really gives a if Russia is doing some cold war style grandstanding about it? 'em.
Dude I never doubted the validity of the official reason for doing this, not sincerely anyways, but I am totally buying that they're using this to kill two birds with one stone.
From my understanding of it, the hydrozine can burn up in the atmosphere, possibly without blowing the thing up. I also believe they don't wanna leave any moderately intact pieces for others to find.....
So I guess its three birds with one stone.
The "coldwar style grandstanding" is moderately interesting to watch unfold. Really, especially in the context of this thread, this article was quite predictable, don't you think?
I'm not boutons_____ing out and saying " ing shrub and this stupid country america blowing up that stupid satellite just to show off"
I'm saying its a potential threat, health wise and national security wise, but really, if you were in charge, why wouldn't you use this opportunity to try out a new weapon?
I think destroying this in some grand fashion would send Iran a message. Stay out of space, ers.
Make that four birds with one stone.
Of course they are testing a new weapon, the government would be stupid not to. In the event that we ever are in conflict with a developed country, anti-satellite weaponry would be an extremely easy way to obliterate huge amounts of infrastructure at a low cost.
It's sad that space for peace is coming to a close, but humanity is violent. Look at all the nukes the world still has.
Yeah, it's gotta be something new, as we already have proven the ability to shoot down satellites with air launched missiles.
"why wouldn't you use this opportunity to try out a new weapon?"
estimated cost to shoot: $60M, probably more like $100M due to overrun. You never know with the military, they have infinite funds available through debt financing and scare-mongering.
estimated chance of not landing in the ocean: infinitesimal.
This a political ploy, show-boating by the WH, NOT a concern for human safety (unless there was risk of coming down in US oil supplier's country)
It would be a huge joke, 100s of Late Night jokes, if dubya missed. I'm sure there are some sleepless nights by the boys and girls of the MDA, Missile Defense Agency, who have had way more public shoot-down failures not offset by successes. Missile shield is one of the Repugs ideological Holy Grails.
"Having the US government spend millions of dollars to destroy a billion-dollar failure to save zero lives is comedic gold."
Experts Scoff at Sat Shoot-Down Rationale
http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/0...rationale.html
What is also funny is that both China and Russia have been pushing for a new treaty on weapons in outer space.
A blogger <> expert.
LMAO at your talking about scare mongering, that's all you do on this board.
The scare-mongering is coming from dubya, not from me.
The chance of any person getting hit by this satellite are one in a trillion, vs. 1 in less than 2 million for getting struck by lightening in the USA.
Keep believing whatever dubya and his military brown-nosing career-padders tell ya, they've never lied to us.
I don't care what the governments real reason is. It isn't anything that will harm America. Anyone who is arguing against our nation on this one is a ing enemy of the US in my view.
ing traitors. Move to a country that embraces you views.
The difference is, the government can't do anything to prevent you or me from getting hit by lightning.
They can (and are planning to) prevent this thing from falling on our heads.
You really are dumb, you know that? I could care less what Bush and Co. are saying about why they are doing this. The facts are that thing is up there, it's coming down, there's a chance it could land in a civilized area, the U.S. can prevent that from becoming a reality (and is).
Everything else is mindless partisan ing.
according to the boutons school of thought, dubya is making all decisions regarding this issue, and will also be firing the missile himself.
For a guy who spent the better part of his young life avoiding military duty, this picture is irony personified.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
