Friday, May 20, 2005


space wars
One of the very first professional articles this editor ever wrote was an interview with the UN ambassador from Austria concerning the Peaceful Uses of Space Treaty the UN was drawing up. William Safire asked to come to the University Club with me to argue his side of the story which was to use our technology in space to dominate the earth by threatening Russia with our nukes while destroying theirs, from space.

In this article, I knocked down this conceit of his by showing how it would create nuclear war by forcing Russia to nuke us before we install such a system. The Russian ambassador to the UN backed up this by denouncing Safire when he read his article in the NYT editorial pages. This was under Jimmy Carter and when Reagan became President he embraced the Star Warriors who wanted a Death Star type domination of earth.

The UN treaty was never signed by the USA. Like the Kyoto Accords, this is yet another reason why the USA is increasingly a rogue nation. Ditto the landmine issue.

Today, the UN office for Outer Space Affairs is in Vienna, no surprise to this editor.

Here is the resolution concerning peaceful uses of space. It seemed pretty clear to me when I wrote supporting this concept. The Japanese playfully do hundreds of stories concerning this breaking down, the Gundam series being the most famous. "Planet Es" is another example of this genre.

The White House said Wednesday that it is not looking at weaponizing space in the face of a newspaper report stating the US Air Force was seeking presidential authority that could lead to such a program.
"Let me make that clear right off the top, because you asked about the weaponization of space, and the policy that we're talking about is not looking at weaponizing space," White House spokesman Scott McClellan told reporters.

However, McClellan said that the administration of US President George W. Bush wants to ensure that its space assets are adequately protected.
The "assets...protected" is the camel's nose under the tent. The WH is eager to squelch the story that leaked out of Congress that the Pentagon wants to put this horrible weapons in space right over the "Holy Land" in particular, the illustration used by them shows Saudi Arabia from the L-1 orbit. To no one's surprise, Russia and China object strenuously.
Russia would consider using force if necessary to respond if the US put a combat weapon into space, according to a senior Russian official.

According to a New York Times report yesterday, the Bush administration was moving towards implementing a new space policy that would move the US closer to placing offensive and defensive weapons in space. Russia, China and many US allies oppose any weaponisation of space, partly out of concerns that it would lead to an extremely expensive post-cold war arms race.
Many Americans think that being militarily aggressive and shoving Putin and others around arrogantly and bellowing is going to make America safe. Under Reagan, we nearly started WWIII repeatedly including the famous time Reagan "playfully" announced that missiles have been launched and were underway towards Russia! Luckily for us, the people running Russia at that time were not senile or insane.

Mutual Assured Destruction happens only when all countries are led by the insane.
In an interview yesterday, Mr Yermakov emphasised that Russia's priority was to solve the problem diplomatically. Russia has voluntarily declared that it will not be the first country to place weapons in space in an effort to encourage the US to move away from space weaponisation.

Force is "not a subject for discussion right now", Mr Yermakov said. "It depends on what happens, and why it happens, upon what agreements we have with the US government, and what understandings we have with the US government."

He added: "Our policy is not to create situations that would lead [to] confrontation. If we don't find such understandings with the US government, and we find ourselves in a situation where we need to react, of course we will do it."
Once again, diplomacy rears its ugly head, doesn't it? The Senate is still debating over the wisdom of sending an irritable, unstable failed "former arms negotiator" who stunningly flubbed the North Korean negotiations when he caused it to collapse into dust thanks to he and his boss calling the North Koreans names, this is the man the Russians will be very aggravated with if they negotiate in the future.
Any new policy would replace a 1996 policy implemented by the Clinton administration calling for a less militaristic approach to space. The 1967 treaty on outer space prevents countries from putting only weapons of mass destruction in space. Other countries are concerned that some of the weapons being considered by the US could be considered new types of WMD.

One weapon the air force would like to develop is the Common Aero Vehicle, which would give the US the ability to launch precision-guided strikes at any point on the globe within a short time frame. The internal US debate over whether the Pentagon needs to put weapons in space gained momentum in 2001 following the conclusions of a commission that warned of the possibility of a "space Pearl Harbor" that could destroy US commercial and military satellites.
The hysterical concern the USA has with WMD while at the same time the lust for WMD in this same country which already has the most WMD in the world is astonishing to watch. The world is yielding less and less to American concerns of disarming everyone while hyperarming itself. This is why we are now in an arms race again. The USA produced this by invading disarmed countries and by extending its own domination. Everyone knows the USA spent more on arms this year than the whole world combined.

Hyper militarism always ends badly. See this article for more of the hyper military lust.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home