Nice to see some Americans don't believe they should have one law for themselves and one for the rest of the world. Condemning China for shooting down a satellite, then doing it yourself, just weakens your credibility. Inventing evidence to invade Iraq and then after you have been caught lying, expecting anyone to believe your evidence against Iran was just silly.
Dubya justifies invading Iraq and attacking Iran because they won't abide by UN resolutions, but he refuses to obey UN resolutions himself. Though in fact Iraq was doing so. The inspectors were in there, proving he was lying about WMDs, so he ordered them out 'because the danger from these non-existent weapons was so great' he couldn't wait.
If the US was invaded and occupied by a hostile power, I like to think the people on this web site would be the first to fight back. What made you think the Iraquis wouldn't do so as well?
The Sock

And before anyone accuses me of being a PHRASECENSOREDPOSTERSHOULDKNOWBETTER. or anti-american: I'm the first to admit that shamefully; the bulk of the democrats went along with the Iraq disaster. As did the British government and opposition.
The big countries act like gangsters and the small ones like prostitutes.
The Sock

Tell that to millions of Iraqis who are getting their lives back together. I remember many brave people (in my family also) who gave up their lives to defend someone else's country, let's see, oh yeah, YOUR'S. Next time you have another Hitler to deal with, then why don't you take care of him yourself?

"...A lot of other countries would love to get their hands on a US spy satellite optics so it makes strategic sense to destroy the satellite..."

I don't dispute what you are saying, but I wonder how many goodies would be left after the sat went thru the heat of reentry? I have to think that this was just a good way to test a starwars type missile. Target 100 miles up today, thousands of miles later...

*sigh*
They say arguing on the internet is like winning the gold medal in the special olympics......yes, you won. You are still a retard. I will now attempt to win the gold medal......
First off, I'm an American. Damn proud of it. No apologies. Yes we as a nation have done things in the past I am embarassed of, but still I feel it is the best country going. MY OPINION!
For all the Bush haters, really let it go. President Bush made a decision (good or bad-its irrelevant, the dye is cast) based on information he received. Who elected the information collectors, doesn't matter. Was the information flawed, doesn't matter. Was the decision made, in the interest of the people, at the time, with the best of intentions.....yes. And that is what matters as far as this assinine, juvinile "Bush lied, people died" rehetoric.
As far as us having one rule we follow and another for other countries, its really quite simple.......
I would like to think that nobody here would have a problem with a police officer having a firearm, nor a member of the military. Same (should) go for a LAW ABIDING CITIZEN. Having said that I don't think anyone here would like to see a career criminal, drug dealer, gang-banger having one. And that is the point that is missed by the so called intellectuals. Yes we can have nuclear arms, yes we can shoot down satalites why? All in all, for all the faults and limitations of the U.S. W we are a benevolent government. Can the same be said of China? Do we want unstable third world countries to have nuclear capabilities? No. Its just not smart.
As to the "unjustified" invasion, when Saddam invaded Kuwait and lost, signing an UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER, the moment he refused to let an U.N. inspector to see whatever, whenever he nullified said treaty. So technically he declared war again in my eyes and got what he deserved.
I agree with Blast, a billion dollars to flex our muscles, to intimidate our foes, or "non-allies" if you perfer, is a small price to pay. I believe in the maxim "pray for peace, but prepare for war" kinda like "be prepared" and "its better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it"

-Bill Liptak
With sincre apologies to the mods.

>> Tell that to millions of Iraqis who are getting their lives >> back together. I remember many brave people (in my family >> also) who gave up their lives to defend someone else's country, let's see, oh yeah, YOUR'S. Next time you have another Hitler to deal with, then why don't you take care of him yourself?

You had no choice Germany declared war on you. Unti then you let Britain face Hitler alone for 18 months.
But this is completely irrelevant. Hitler was the aggressor then. You are now. It's absurd to compare Hitler with this wreck of a country with it's half a million children dead through the sanctions, it's rubbish army and no WMDs. Iraq was no threat to anyone. Saddam was safely in his box. He didn't even dare retaliate when the US and UK bombed him
And the Iraquis aren't getting their lives back together; you've killed thousands of them. Made their lives a nightmare and installed a puppet government.

Yes, it was definately a great way to test our missle system. As for burning up on re-entery, space rocks not much larger than a marble can become meteorites. Heck, when the shuttle blew up on re-entry a few years ago peices much larger than this spy satellite were found across Texas. The high-quality glass used in the optics systems have a very high melting point, they probably wouldn't even notice the heat of re-entry.

-Blast

Hydrazine -- maybe
Secret/cutting edge technology -- definitely
Harm in giving it a shot -- only political

I'm sure a bunch of guys were certain they could hit it and while a miss would have been embarrassing it would not have added to the problem. The only fall-out was the issue with China and it appears they only want info. Personally I don't think anybody really cares if a country shoots down one of their own satellites; although I'd rather the Chinese had shot theirs in a lower orbit so it would burn up rather than acting as more space junk.

What they do care about is the demonstration of an ABM capability. The Chinese demonstrated their capability, now we have demonstrated ours, but from an operational/deployed platform. Star Wars anyone? There about 60 Arleigh Burke destroyers currently in service. Now that we have an ABM capability, we can negotiate it away with a new ABM Treaty or not. Maybe it should be deployed world wide. Put a few in the Persian Gulf. . .

Does the shuttle give you an anti-satellite capability? You could simply drive up to any satellite and disable it?
The Sock

One big difference:

The Chinese project littered space with debris that will stay around nearly indefinitely in orbit. This endangers all current and future satellites, AND manned missions US, Chinese, British, EVERYONE.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Chinese_anti-satellite_missile_test
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Britain_Concerned_By_Chinese_Satellite_Shoot_Down_999.html

The US project was at very low orbital levels. Nearly everything will deorbit in less than a month.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=awst&id=news/aw021808p2.xml


Even if the explanation to justify THIS project, is a bit contrived (a lie?), the skill is good to have. What if the next satellite to deorbit in a disorganized fashion (“my fault, your fault, nobody’s fault") does truly endanger a populated area, it would be nice to offer this service, wouldn’t it?