Organizing Notes

Bruce Gagnon is coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space. He offers his own reflections on organizing and the state of America's declining empire....

My Photo
Name:
Location: Bath, Maine, United States

Monday, June 13, 2005


Space industry depiction of the "Rods from God" space weapon the Bush administration is now developing. Bush is expected to release a new national space policy this month giving the green light for further development and possible deployment of offensive space weapons.

6 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Space industry depiction of the "Rods from God" space weapon the Bush administration is now developing."

Thanks for a timely, perfect example of the kind of bogus hyperventilation described in my opinion piece...


USA TODAY // June 14, 2005 // The Forum
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20050614/oplede14.art.htm

HYPERVENTILATING OVER 'SPACE WEAPONS'

Mere military exploration of space hardware doesn't mean
the next Star Wars is at hand. In fact, misinformation
in such matters is quite dangerous in this world.

By James Oberg

Is the sanctity of the heavens about to be violated by the United States making a unilateral introduction of aggressive weapons that could spark a destabilizing arms race? Is the White House about to unleash an unprecedented expansion of regions to fight over in the future?
You'd be forgiven for thinking so, based on news reports in recent weeks and on complaints from foreign countries such as Russia and China. According to major U.S. newspapers, a wide range of high-tech armaments may soon be approved and funded, with deployment in space only a matter of time. At that point, reluctant foreign nations will feel compelled to "respond in kind," unleashing an expensive and dangerous new arms race.

But a sober reality check can put the issue into better perspective. If anything is likely to spark a "new arms race," this time in outer space, it's unlikely to be the usual suspects. Gung-ho space-superiority mantras have been coming from U.S. Air Force leaders for decades, but without funding, it has mostly been just bold talk. Space hardware with weapons-like applications has also been around, on Earth and in space, for decades — but using it to break things in orbit never made much military sense, then or now or in the foreseeable future.

Nothing here has changed. No, the impetus for a future foreign "reaction" doesn't need a genuine U.S. "action" — it only needs the near-hysterical ranting from American newspapers, from lobby groups posing as "information centers" but having long-familiar agendas, and from foreign nations eager to score cheap propaganda points. By whipping up anxieties with little rational justification, these self-serving fear mongers may actually lead to the creation of something well worth fearing: the arming of a new battleground, out in space.

Phantom threats (continued)

6/13/05, 11:47 PM  
Blogger Brian Dunbar said...

Hunh. You see a deadly threat to .. something. I see an oportunity to be made by civilian companies hauling stuff to space for the Air Force.

6/20/05, 11:43 AM  
Blogger Stephen said...

A reply to Oberg's column can be found here.

A sample:

"According to Oberg, it’s not Pentagon space weapon plans that are fueling countries to respond, but the newspapers and non-governmental organizations that are reporting on those plans. Oberg shouldn’t blame the messenger.

While “Rods from God” and “death stars” may exist only on paper, the Pentagon has developed simpler weapons to disable and destroy satellites. While some of these have obvious dual-use, such as inspecting or refueling other satellites, others such as the Army’s Kinetic Energy Anti-Satellite are quite clear in their mission to destroy satellites."

The conclusion:

"Space warfare may be a long way off, but the steps the United States takes today will affect the decisions we make tomorrow. Let’s lead by example and draw the line on outer-space weapons."

Read on.

6/21/05, 3:37 AM  
Anonymous JimO said...

And the Russians have responded (one Russian, that is) -- can anyone figure out what he's trying to say?

http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20050622/40744043.html

Oberg's law: the case for the space defense
June 22, 19:21 Moscow Time


jim O
www.jamesoberg.com

6/22/05, 5:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

jimo (www.jamesoberg.com) adds:

like minds = like thoughts?

"Islamic Community" writes: COMET HIT BY 'RODS FROM GOD' DEATH FROM SPACE PROGRAM

http://chiapas.mediosindependientes.org/display.php3?article_id=114111

The arrogantly named "Rods from God" weapons from space weapons of mass destruction "WMD" program is well underway and has received a substantial boost from the successful trial attack on comet Tempel-1. The NASA probe "Deep Impact" provided military observers with significant data and analysis concerning the proper design for kinetic energy weapons configured to slam into an Earth ground target, releasing an explosion similar to an atomic weapon but without the radiation. For more "Rods from God":
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22RODS+FROM+GOD%22&svnum=10&hl=en&lr=&sa=N&tab=iw

7/5/05, 7:57 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jim Oberg posts: More like-minded folks who agree with Bruce:

http://www.memritv.org/Transcript.asp?P1=740

7/5/2005 Clip No. 740

Renowned Egyptian Geologist Zaghlul Al-Naggar: Deep Impact Spacecraft Had a Military Goal and Negligible Scientific Value


Following is an excerpt from and interview with Egyptian geologist Dr. Zaghlul Al-Naggar, which aired on Al-Jazeera TV on July 5, 2005.
Dr. Zaghlul Al-Naggar: The main goal of this operation (Deep Impact) is military. America wants to prove to the world that it is capable of hitting a target with a circumference of no more than six kilometers, hundreds of millions of kilometers away. The goal is first and foremost a military one, and its scientific benefit is negligible. I doubt that the samples they obtained could yield scientific results of any value.

7/7/05, 5:12 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home