President Trump- The Implications

[rebound]

We have had the space force as part of the Air Force since the 40's - right after the first rocket flew in this country.   That's over 1/4 the life of the country.  It's almost as long as there has been an Air Force.  They have done a great job with it.  These are the experts in all things from ground level up - they have been going there for decades.  We recognized long ago that if we don't at least have an overwhelming presence in space, we are truly doomed.  By overwhelming, I mean the ability to obliterate totally.  (It IS the current version of MAD.)  They are the ones that have been doing space for all that time...leave it where it belongs. 

Why, if these people are so much about efficiency in government, reducing the 'size' of govt., and making better use of resources, would they want another large bureaucracy?   The Pentagon doesn't want that - and they are the experts!   Well, except for that font of all knowledge...Trump!   (Everyone get the intense sarcasm, irony, and disgust over his record of calling our General staff stupid, and insulting and calling our POW's cowards...?? )

And more importantly, how would splitting up the Air Force improve anything??

I was all set to jump on your "1940's" comment, because I was certain that the Air Force split from the army in the '50s.  But no, you are correct, it was 1947.  But what became the Air Force was part of the Army starting in 1907.  (40 years)  And I am sure there were those that said at the time that we didn't need to split off the Air Force from the Army then, either.

I do agree that the Space Force angle is another aggrandizing play by Trump, but that in-and-of-itself doesn't mean it's a bad idea.

[patric]

CNN is reporting that Trump May be close to shutting down Mueller. Finally some good news. Need to move on

Go on, pull that one Jenga piece that is delaying the impeachment.  Please.

[dbacksfan 2.0]

We have had the space force as part of the Air Force since the 40's - right after the first rocket flew in this country.   That's over 1/4 the life of the country.  It's almost as long as there has been an Air Force.  They have done a great job with it.  These are the experts in all things from ground level up - they have been going there for decades.  We recognized long ago that if we don't at least have an overwhelming presence in space, we are truly doomed.  By overwhelming, I mean the ability to obliterate totally.  (It IS the current version of MAD.)  They are the ones that have been doing space for all that time...leave it where it belongs.  


Why, if these people are so much about efficiency in government, reducing the 'size' of govt., and making better use of resources, would they want another large bureaucracy?   The Pentagon doesn't want that - and they are the experts!   Well, except for that font of all knowledge...Trump!   (Everyone get the intense sarcasm, irony, and disgust over his record of calling our General staff stupid, and insulting and calling our POW's cowards...?? )


And more importantly, how would splitting up the Air Force improve anything??

No sheite. Yeah I know we've had a space command since after WWII. My point is that China and Russia are advancing weapons to knock out satellites, where do we stand in this technology? I'm not advocating splitting up the AF, it needs some refinement and adjusting.

BTW, my dad was an engineer at McDonnell Douglas at TIA from 1960 until he retired in 1987.

[Ed W]

From Wikipedia:

"The Outer Space Treaty represents the basic legal framework of international space law. Among its principles, it bars states party to the treaty from placing weapons of mass destruction in Earth orbit, installing them on the Moon or any other celestial body, or otherwise stationing them in outer space. It exclusively limits the use of the Moon and other celestial bodies to peaceful purposes and expressly prohibits their use for testing weapons of any kind, conducting military maneuvers, or establishing military bases, installations, and fortifications (Article IV). However, the Treaty does not prohibit the placement of conventional weapons in orbit and thus some highly destructive attack strategies such as kinetic bombardment are still potentially allowable."

The United States signed this treaty in 1967.

[swake]

From Wikipedia:

"The Outer Space Treaty represents the basic legal framework of international space law. Among its principles, it bars states party to the treaty from placing weapons of mass destruction in Earth orbit, installing them on the Moon or any other celestial body, or otherwise stationing them in outer space. It exclusively limits the use of the Moon and other celestial bodies to peaceful purposes and expressly prohibits their use for testing weapons of any kind, conducting military maneuvers, or establishing military bases, installations, and fortifications (Article IV). However, the Treaty does not prohibit the placement of conventional weapons in orbit and thus some highly destructive attack strategies such as kinetic bombardment are still potentially allowable."

The United States signed this treaty in 1967.

But...

Space Force!

[patric]

From Wikipedia:

"The Outer Space Treaty represents the basic legal framework of international space law. Among its principles, it bars states party to the treaty from placing weapons of mass destruction in Earth orbit, installing them on the Moon or any other celestial body, or otherwise stationing them in outer space. It exclusively limits the use of the Moon and other celestial bodies to peaceful purposes and expressly prohibits their use for testing weapons of any kind, conducting military maneuvers, or establishing military bases, installations, and fortifications (Article IV). However, the Treaty does not prohibit the placement of conventional weapons in orbit and thus some highly destructive attack strategies such as kinetic bombardment are still potentially allowable."

The United States signed this treaty in 1967.

About that time:


"We're going to land an H-bomb on somebody somewhere"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkOnX3Tkf6E

(watch out for Isis!)

[heironymouspasparagus]

I was all set to jump on your "1940's" comment, because I was certain that the Air Force split from the army in the '50s.  But no, you are correct, it was 1947.  But what became the Air Force was part of the Army starting in 1907.  (40 years)  And I am sure there were those that said at the time that we didn't need to split off the Air Force from the Army then, either.

I do agree that the Space Force angle is another aggrandizing play by Trump, but that in-and-of-itself doesn't mean it's a bad idea.

I will have to look around and find something to post for you to jump on - I don't want to disappoint too much.!!!

My uncle started in Army Air corp, WWII, then transitioned to Naval Air at San Diego after the war.  Was a fighter pilot in WWII and Korea - two different groups.  Then test pilot in San Diego where he center punched the runway  during tests of remote control aircraft.  He was riding an early 'drone'.  It failed.  There is the question then of should Naval Air be part of Air Force, or Marine Aviation be part of Air Force...?  With the "logic" being shown by Trump Clown Show, that would make much more sense than a Space Force.  And that makes no sense at all.  Imagine two separate entities on 1 aircraft carrier.  Similar thing here.

Goes to mission and scope.  The mission is essentially the same - all things above the surface of the earth.  Scope - well, maybe that will change in a few years, but right now it is overseeing dozens of satellites, figuring out ways to defend them, and keep an eye on thousands of asteroids.  Do we need to start spooling up for war/defense from the aliens??  Perhaps yes.  But ANY of that type of combat - whether with aliens or earthbound adversaries - would involve essentially similar tactics with similar concepts for combat methods and equipment from air to space.   We are gonna watch what's going on below and around us.  Gonna drop stuff on places we don't like.   Given the coordinating difficulties between all military branches right now, do you think transitioning from one complete service to another in just thousands of feet is workable?  This will be a cluster - they need closer contact than that. 

I heard this morning there are 18,000 or so people currently active in Space command.  This will no doubt grow - probably much faster than other branches and in future, it may well make sense to rename Air Force to something more all-encompassing...they could do it now for that matter.  But to have two different armed forces separated by a couple hundred thousand feet with two entirely different entities makes zero sense.  But that is what we have come to expect from Trump, isn't it??  Grandiose Megalomania.  Even more than average for country leaders.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Go on, pull that one Jenga piece that is delaying the impeachment.  Please.

These people will never move to get rid of him...just listen to Devin Nunes comments on it.   And then ya gotta look at what is right behind him in line!!   Would be just as bad.  A better approach would be if there were balance in the system - when President is one party, control of Congress is another.  That works about as well as we can hope for.

[heironymouspasparagus]

No sheite. Yeah I know we've had a space command since after WWII. My point is that China and Russia are advancing weapons to knock out satellites, where do we stand in this technology? I'm not advocating splitting up the AF, it needs some refinement and adjusting.

BTW, my dad was an engineer at McDonnell Douglas at TIA from 1960 until he retired in 1987.

Kid I grew up with across the street has been a PhD Physicist since the 70's working on a couple different things (that I know of) - particle beam, light beam, etc.  We have had some very sophisticated equipment for quite a while, it is getting better, and yes - the Chinese and Russians are getting there too.  No one is sitting still on this ever.  

I got to work with Rockwell long ago on the B1 program - on equipment to help with reducing radar cross section.  Fun stuff - would love to do some more of that.!!  So your Dad, I, and several thousand others, made contributions to the defense of this country that are arguably at least as valuable as any military member, except for those who died in that effort - see note about my Uncle...  The B1 is still one of the mainstays of our 'umbrella' of protection - covering the bu$$s of hundreds of millions of people every day.  Just like the B52, Stealth, etc.  

They all make a contribution that shows how working in concert as a Society works wonders.

B1 'appears' as a Cessna 180 coming at you at about 2,000 mph!  When the enemy first 'sees' it, they are already dead.  Hey, there is some hyperbole for rebound to jump on...!!  Goal accomplished.!

[heironymouspasparagus]

From Wikipedia:

"The Outer Space Treaty represents the basic legal framework of international space law. Among its principles, it bars states party to the treaty from placing weapons of mass destruction in Earth orbit, installing them on the Moon or any other celestial body, or otherwise stationing them in outer space. It exclusively limits the use of the Moon and other celestial bodies to peaceful purposes and expressly prohibits their use for testing weapons of any kind, conducting military maneuvers, or establishing military bases, installations, and fortifications (Article IV). However, the Treaty does not prohibit the placement of conventional weapons in orbit and thus some highly destructive attack strategies such as kinetic bombardment are still potentially allowable."

The United States signed this treaty in 1967.

Nothing stops us from putting a craft in the asteroid belt for 'scientific exploration'.  And if we got in a war, and someone on that station got agitated and was distracted and accidentally bumped into a couple of  asteroids that put in on a trajectory to coincidentally land on Moscow or Beijing, well, "Oops...my bad.!!"  Who hasn't played the game "Asteroids" and doesn't understand how easy it is to change directions that end up causing collateral damage...?

[Ed W]

These people will never move to get rid of him...just listen to Devin Nunes comments on it.   And then ya gotta look at what is right behind him in line!!   Would be just as bad....

Pence is marginally better than Trump because he has some respect for the process of government and it's traditions. He's still a right wing ideologue who'd gladly substitute his version of the bible for our secular law, but at least he doesn't tweet like a teenage girl. He wouldn't make policy via Twitter.

[BKDotCom]

Pence is marginally better than Trump because he has some respect for the process of government and it's traditions. He's still a right wing ideologue who'd gladly substitute his version of the bible for our secular law, but at least he doesn't tweet like a teenage girl. He wouldn't make policy via Twitter.

Twitter Policy vs Bible Policy
I'll take option C please

[swake]

Pence is marginally better than Trump because he has some respect for the process of government and it's traditions. He's still a right wing ideologue who'd gladly substitute his version of the bible for our secular law, but at least he doesn't tweet like a teenage girl. He wouldn't make policy via Twitter.

I also don't think he destabilize NATO or would conduct trade wars against our allies while having a public love fest with Kim and Putin.

Pense is bad, but nowhere on the level of Trump.

[patric]

Trumps "Magic Wand"

[heironymouspasparagus]

Pence is marginally better than Trump because he has some respect for the process of government and it's traditions. He's still a right wing ideologue who'd gladly substitute his version of the bible for our secular law, but at least he doesn't tweet like a teenage girl. He wouldn't make policy via Twitter.

He literally believes and spews regularly that cigarettes don't cause cancer.  Or any other health related problems.

Much like asbestos has gotten a bad rap all these years....