http://www.guardian.co.uk/space/article/0,14493,1345460,00.html
Apparently, the US government has been drawing up plans to establish "Space superiority".
BUT The article says "Internal USAF Documents", and does not elaborate more on the source. Still, this is really disturbing if it's true. I can only imagine the consequences if the US government's military policies are carried into space.
I read this and thought... 31337. Wont happen, but it sounds cool.
[addsig]
Meh, it'll happen one day.
[addsig]
Fact it, anywhere someone hasnt touched yet, I own. I own jupiter, and mars. And the belt of comets and stuff. I own them. So NER nasa!
Mephs lays claim to everything outside the earth.
[addsig]
The US conquering space? They couldn't even conquer Iraq properly 
.
Shush, the gaseous planerts have LOTS of oil
Here's hoping THEY get 'liberated' from the zero tolerance regime of the anti-breathing terrorists. And the world is happy 
.
| ? quoting Andrei |
|
The US conquering space? They couldn't even conquer Iraq properly |
*glares*
funny, i'll admit we failed at something, but i was not aware we were even attempting "conquer"
[addsig]
| ? quoting Mephs |
|
Shush, the gaseous planerts have LOTS of oil Here's hoping THEY get 'liberated' from the zero tolerance regime of the anti-breathing terrorists. And the world is happy |
L O L ! 
Its like Space Cowbows. 'Cept the nuclear satalite will be American, not Russian.
This is going to spell Star Wars. But it wont be a long long time ago, in a far far away galaxy. Alright, Im going to design my very own X-Wing and frag USAF's ass
| ? quoting Orpheus | ||
*glares* funny, i'll admit we failed at something, but i was not aware we were even attempting "conquer" |
Oh, sorry, i forgot the quotes around "conquer" 
.
Umm... Yeah, I've no idea what you are all babbling about. What's being talked about is neither prohibitively expensive, or particularly scary. What's so different about satellite based weapons vs. the GPS system or Spy satellites? The US already has hundreds of defense related satellites in Orbit, and it won't be that expensive or difficult to add a few more. Besides that, the idea of non-weaponized space is just silly. That's like an agreement saying that fighters and bombers are illegal, but recon flights are OK 
Besides, you could argue strongly that ICBMs are space-weapons anyway so these things are nothing new. It's a very natural evolution of America's "air power" emphasis.
| ? quoting Andrei |
| I've heard that a private company has managed to build an aircraft that carried a single man into orbit and back. This is a step in the right direction. |
Spaceship One reached neither orbital height nor velocity. It cleared the earth's atmosphere at a little over 100 km and came back down. That is a far cry from an orbital venture for two reasons. First of all, significant heat shielding is unnecessary for such a gentle "reentry", and second, it didn't have to boost nearly as much fuel as it would have had the objective been orbital velocities (16-18,000 mph). It is a step in the right direction, but not such a large one as you might think.
[addsig]
| ? quoting Crono |
| I like how everyone is posting s**t I already said |
several people left me feeling like a moron today, if it will make you feel better you may do so as well.. in this way you can participate in posting something someone else already had, and you will not notice so much when people post things you already did..
go ahead, beat me up, it will make you feel better
