Speculation is that it’s a new Russian space-based military capability for which the US doesn’t have a defense. Likely a ploy for more money diverted to the defense industry?
intercst
3 Likes
Or the “new” hypersonic rocket
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-uses-zircon-hypersonic-missile-ukraine-first-time-researchers-say-2024-02-12/
Or cyber attacks.
Neil De Gras Tyson says (kinetic) weapons in space are ineffective.
FWIW.
ralph
2 Likes
My top 3 guesses:
- Putin is really Edgar the Bug, the giant cockroach from Men In Black
- Tucker Carson is a Tesla developed bot version of Elon Musk
- Taylor Swift really is a Russian Kremlin asset working as a deep undercover election psyop agent.
I’m kind of leaning towards number 3.
8 Likes
Washington Post reports the Russian weapon is likely a space-based nuclear device designed to disable satellites.
{{ The Russian government has experimented with the use of nuclear explosions or directed energy to disable satellites, according to one U.S. official, who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive information. Experts have raised concerns that a nation could detonate a nuclear weapon in space to interfere with satellites through the emission of radiation. }}
intercst
2 Likes
Keep in mind, TFG created the “Space Force”. Can’t have an armed service without having an enemy for it.
3 Likes
Not funny garbage and OT
1 Like
I thought there was an agreement not to deploy nuclear weapons in space?
“Declaration of Legal Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space,”
Not only was this signed by Russia, but it was unanimously adopted by the UN
I’m trying to figure out how Russia could detonate a nuclear weapon in space without affecting all their own satellites at the same time.
I suppose you could have a bunch of new ones ready to launch to replace them, but it seems a theory with mile wide holes in it.
Then again, weapons deployment is often weirder than one might expect. Here’s a missile being used to take out terrorists without causing (significant) collateral damage. It’s called the Ginsu, because it doesn’t use explosives, it uses, yes, knives which deploy out of the sides at the last minute to shred the target, presumably into nice little fillets you can put on crackers.
Both the Central Intelligence Agency and the Pentagon have used the weapon while closely guarding its existence. A modified version of the well-known Hellfire missile, the weapon carries an inert warhead. Instead of exploding, it is designed to plunge more than 100 pounds of metal through the tops of cars and buildings to kill its target without harming individuals and property close by.To the targeted person, it is as if a speeding anvil fell from the sky, the officials said. But this variant of the Hellfire missile, designated as the R9X, also comes equipped with a different kind of payload: a halo of six long blades that are stowed inside and then deploy through the skin of the missile seconds before impact to ensure that it shreds anything in its tracks.
They can’t. So either this weapon is a bluff. Of they simply don’t care. They are likely no where near as satellite dependent as we are after all.
1 Like
I dated Taylor once. Or a Taylor. I do not know now. I am getting old.
Strategically in an all hands on board battle in central Europe Russia wins.
Russia has 167 satellites. Russia is not that reliant on them. Russia has proximity to the battlefield. The US much less so. Just to send a ship takes GPS.
Which country has the most satellites in space?
the United States
Of the 5,465 active artificial satellites orbiting the Earth as of April 30, 2022, 3,433 belong to the United States. This is by far the largest number of any single country, with their nearest competitor, China, accounting for only 541.Dec 8, 2023
2 Likes
I suspect it’s some kind of “directed energy” weapon using nuclear power as the energy source – think laser beam, or microwave that you would aim at a target. You’re right that you can’t just have a big explosion without damaging your satellites, too. Even blowing up one satellite and creating a lot of debris is a potential problem for your satellites. Ideally, you’d want to “cook or burn” your enemy’s satellites while keeping them in one piece.
intercst
2 Likes
Do not believe in the honesty of Russia. They violate all norms and treaties when it pleases them.
2 Likes
Like, say an ex-president?
7 Likes
Interesting question. Could a US President, ex or not, create a satellite killer program on their own, bring it into operation on their own, and then deploy it at will on their own? Probably not.
Was it Zachary Taylor?
DB2
1 Like
Could have been. He wore dresses and a wig.
2 Likes
This has been around for a long time.
I remember seeing the promotional video for this when I was a kid.
It was on NBC on Saturday morning. I think it was made by ACME.
I’m pretty sure it never worked properly
Oh, I found it here
Mike
5 Likes
R9X Flying Ginsu
intercst
3 Likes