• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

George Takei Just Posted This On Twitter about Space Force

Three swings, three misses. Walk it off, dude.

Seriously -- what is the need for a "Space Force?" What service does it provide that could not have been provided at a cheaper cost by the Air Force? The industrial-scale combat utility of an airplane is obvious as early as World War I, but I'm not aware of any nation with space technology advanced enough to possess industrial-scale combat utility.
 
Seriously -- what is the need for a "Space Force?" What service does it provide that could not have been provided at a cheaper cost by the Air Force? The industrial-scale combat utility of an airplane is obvious as early as World War I, but I'm not aware of any nation with space technology advanced enough to possess industrial-scale combat utility.
Given the extent that our modern infrastructure that is space dependent, it only makes sense to have a dedicated organization to defend and maintain that infrastructure, and not a command that the USAF could (and has) treated like a vestigial organ that was just taking money away from new airplanes. The Russians have done a test launch of a new anti-satellite weapon in the past week, as a matter of fact: https://www.ibtimes.com/us-space-co...-russia-testing-anti-satellite-weapon-3016437. No doubt the the Chinese are working toward the same capability, and it likely will not take long for them to achieve it. The next conflict between the major powers, will begin in space to a large degree. It just makes sense to have our best foot forward before it happens.
 
Thing is, there are currently no military assets in space besides satellites. Seems a bit silly to form an entire branch of the military just to launch, monitor and maintain satellites.
 
Thing is, there are currently no military assets in space besides satellites. Seems a bit silly to form an entire branch of the military just to launch, monitor and maintain satellites.
"Just" satellites? Don't think you truly grasp how much your daily life depends on "just" satellites. And it's not only about military assets, there's a lot of commercial and civil government hardware needs looking after as well.
 
Given the extent that our modern infrastructure that is space dependent, it only makes sense to have a dedicated organization to defend and maintain that infrastructure, and not a command that the USAF could (and has) treated like a vestigial organ that was just taking money away from new airplanes.

The damn thing's gonna have only a small fraction of the personnel the other services have, maybe 20,000 including civilians; that's enough enough people to warrant an entirely separate service. Yeah, the Air Force brass shouldn't over-emphasis fighters, but the Navy also shouldn't over-prioritize aircraft carriers; are we gonna found a separate service for every under-utilized division of the existing services?

The Russians have done a test launch of a new anti-satellite weapon in the past week, as a matter of fact: https://www.ibtimes.com/us-space-co...-russia-testing-anti-satellite-weapon-3016437. No doubt the the Chinese are working toward the same capability, and it likely will not take long for them to achieve it. The next conflict between the major powers, will begin in space to a large degree. It just makes sense to have our best foot forward before it happens.

I'm not at all persuaded that a half-cocked bureaucratic reorganization of an Air Force division that is not realistically self-sufficient and which will constitute a money-suck for ceremonial bells and whistles (like its own goddamn marching band, no doubt), whose chief mission will be launching and monitoring satellites and asking the Air Force to intercept enemy missiles on its behalf, is "putting our best foot forward." You will perhaps forgive me if, in addition to being keenly aware that our entire military budget a bloated obscenity that serves mostly to feed the imperialist hubris of our ruling class and kill untold thousands of innocent people every year, I find myself not thrilled with the idea of some warmongering happy assholes wanting to play space soldier. You will perhaps especially forgive me if I conclude that, as Michael E. O'Hanlon of the Brookings Institute has noted, this "Space Force" will be de facto a drain upon the Treasury and conclude therefore that it is little more than a new con for lobbyists, contractors, and other assorted public spending grifters. Finally, you'll perhaps forgive me if I note that this particular money-suck in the context of there being very little in the way of space travel (really low-orbital) infrastructure for any nation, let along low-orbital combat infrastructure, the damn thing is likely to leave the United States militarily weaker.

Seriously -- if you wanna cosplay at being a Starfleet officer, download Star Trek Online instead.
 
Yeah, okay. I see what you got going on. I'm done with this, now.

Unable to provide a rational argument in favor of the establishment of the Space Force whose logo -- a faux competition to choose said logo having been used by as a partisan fundraiser by the sitting president, I might add -- he wears, he now withdraws. Gotcha.
 

Unable to provide a rational argument in favor of the establishment of the Space Force whose logo -- a faux competition to choose said logo having been used by as a partisan fundraiser by the sitting president, I might add -- he wears, he now withdraws. Gotcha.


An article loaded with half-baked arguments, many of which cite no direct examplkes. I can't blame Mysterion from withdrawing either.
 
Seriously -- what is the need for a "Space Force?" What service does it provide that could not have been provided at a cheaper cost by the Air Force? .

Because the Air Farce is run by fighter jocks. Missileers were treated like stepchildren. One of the things X-37 is doing is paving the way for space based solar power, as wanted by Coyote Smith and others. The Air Force even balked at the idea of GPS and cruise missiles. Dewayne Day at The Space Review often writes about how space advocates had problems getting their own priorities out there.

The Clementine mission was made possible with SDI advances. I think that—in the past—folks on the Left viewed all this as just so much war mongering. Yet it was the Soviet R-7, not the B-52, that brought the future to us.

The problem is this: In the same way the Marines still get the dregs of the budget while still being under the heel of the carrier groupies that run the USN— Space Force is still part of the USAF.

I support Space Force because the military bloat is with the carrier groupies. Let us say there was a valid need to strike target X. When carrier groups telegraph punches, and when they lose every war game to submariners, it shows the fact that the Pentagon still thinks we are fighting the battle of Midway. Space should have done to the carrier what the carrier did to the battleship.

Space needs its own Billy Mitchell.

In terms of bloated military budgets—the reason Nikita pushed for missile development was because he knew it was *cheaper* to focus on missiles than to compete with the USA blue water navy for blue water Navy—or bomber for bomber. What broke the USSR was moving away from space and building conventional assets.

The Cold War/WWII idea of having bases, beans bodies all over the place—the expensive logistics? That costs you money. R-7 made money for Russia.

What is stupid is China building carriers now. Once their sailors build a constituency, they may try to get more money away from their space advocates. The fighter jocks are the problem. Cut them, give the A-10 to the Army, and use F-35 money for SPSS like Coyote Smith wants.

The taxpayers always got more return on space anyway.

If we must kill a branch—it should be the USAF. They took so very much money that the other services made note. So when space advocates came around, their duties were divvying up in other branches so as to keep them silenced, so that tanks planes and ships stayed the focus, and space advocates ranked below the janitor and got the broom closet.
 
Last edited:
Because the Air Farce is run by fighter jocks. Missileers were treated like stepchildren. One of the things X-37 is doing is paving the way for space based solar power, as wanted by Coyote Smith and others. The Air Force even balked at the idea of GPS and cruise missiles. Dewayne Day at The Space Review often writes about how space advocates had problems getting their own priorities out there.

Then by that logic, why not have a second navy, a United States Submarine Force, dedicated to submarines, since subs get the short stick vs aircraft carriers? And a second air force, a United States Drone Force, dedicated to unmanned drones? And why not another service, a United States Cyber Force, dedicated to information technology warfare?

Like, at what point do we draw the line on not founding a new military service for every possible field of specialized combat?

Space should have done to the carrier what the carrier did to the battleship.

I have yet to see any real evidence space warfare technology is capable of being an effective means of combat.

The Cold War/WWII idea of having bases, beans bodies all over the place—the expensive logistics? That costs you money.

I mean, yes, but I think you're forgetting that the point of overseas bases and the infrastructure needed to support them is not to win wars per se; it's to project force into the territories of our client states and thereby maintain U.S. global hegemony.
 
Okay, folks...

We're veering way off course here, at least in terms of this forum.

The pros and cons of Space Force can be discussed in Miscellaneous.

Thanks
 
Seriously -- what is the need for a "Space Force?" What service does it provide that could not have been provided at a cheaper cost by the Air Force? The industrial-scale combat utility of an airplane is obvious as early as World War I, but I'm not aware of any nation with space technology advanced enough to possess industrial-scale combat utility.

According to Trump supporters: "it sounds good" is the reason they want a space force:
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

See, it has a "badass" name, so the overgrown 8 year olds love it, regardless of any practical implications.
 
It's funny, I was recently reading the novel Sixteenth Watch by Myke Cole. Set in a vaguely defined future about the US Coast Guard having a presence in space, the novel also mentions other US organizations and their space presence, including other branches of the military such as the Navy, Marines and Air Force and even the FBI and the US Postal Service, but makes no mention to a Space Force at all. The novel was only just published earlier this year too, so it wasn't a case of the author not knowing that a Space Force could someday be a thing.
 
I move that we declare world peace and move all our armed forces, of every country, into the United States Space Force.
And then pretend this combined service is not a military, even though it fights all our wars.

But the real question is, will the personnel be paid money?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sci
Well, we did get Hubble from the KH-11.
Dwayne Day writes about how even the military itself was happy with film and how, early on, real time imaging wasn’t a priority.

One of his articles on N-1 footage was even called Dagger of the Mind.
 
I just learned that one new recruit is a horse named Ghost, used to patrol the sensitive launch areas instead of ATVs.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top