The United States has deployed weapons in space and will use them to defend American forces, Air Force Secretary Troy Meink said Monday – the first public acknowledgment of such capabilities in orbit and a deliberate signal to those that pose potential threats in the domain.

“China develops and operates space and counterspace capabilities as part of a military modernization strategy,” the US Space Force says on its website, while “Russia views space as a warfighting domain and believes space supremacy will be a decisive factor in future conflicts.”

US military officials have repeatedly warned the two countries are testing new offensive space capabilities, citing examples such as Russian satellite constellation training missions that Washington says could demonstrate “attack and defend tactics” for future combat and China’s development of a nuclear capable partial-orbit hypersonic missile.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 75 points 1 week ago (9 children)

Predictably disappointing, the Outer Space Treaty was too vague and toothless as a cornerstone of space legislation.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 56 points 1 week ago (10 children)

    So we're just gonna accept instant Kessler syndrome on the opening of a war between two space powers? Cool. Coolcoolcool. Love this.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 week ago (5 children)

    I don’t think we’re necessarily talking about kinetic weapons here, something like GPS or Starlink equivalent jamming could be equally devastating.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 week ago* (4 children)
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    I wonder how many high-speed ball bearings you'd have to launch to start a chain reaction?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 40 points 1 week ago

    The one place capitalism couldn’t taint, has been tainted by capitalism…

  • source
  • [–] 31 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    Weapons in space.

    No universal healthcare.

    Massive wealth disparity only getting worse.

    Women losing rights.

    Democracy threatened.

    Inflation.

    Student debt epidemic.

    Poison food.

    Resurging racism.

    Climate change.

    Coooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 20 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    "Good evening, I'm Jess Perkins with Casey Wong. Top story: Santa Barbara. 10,000 acres of wooded residential land were scorched in an instant when a laser cannon aboard the Strategic Defense Peace Platform misfired today during routine startup tests. Casey?"

    "Yes, it was a day of mourning for the families of 113 known dead at this hour. Among them: two former United States presidents who had retired in the Santa Barbara area. A day of mourning for a country."

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    Does this at least mean we can work with China again for space stuff? Wasn't the whole rationale for NOT working with them on ISS etc that they were deploying weapons in space, or is this one of those predictable "rules for thee and not for me" scenarios?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 week ago*

    China is just a boogeyman always referenced whenever the government is manufacturing consent from the masses. For example: for the last decade they’ve been referencing chinas mass surveillance as a reason for Americans to be afraid of china because they are not a free country. Now it’s flipping and the story is that china is using bots to make American’s think data centers are bad.

    Time china mass surveillance 2019

    China fueling data center rage

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago

    Probably the latter. But it's just tit for that basically. China is a pro at making agreements, then breaking them. For instance they fish other countries waters illegally because they've already overfished and destroyed their ecosystem. They just turn their transponders off. They draw their countries borders with a crayon as well.

    Who's worse? That's tough, even as a US citizen I'll tell you we're hypocritical as hell. I think Americans have a lot more country pride than most others, and it's usually looked at as arrigance.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 1 week ago

    And we're believing anything this administration claims?

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 1 week ago (3 children)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 7 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    Really annoying how certain media outlets treat every single thing the US military says as fact without independently verifying it themselves

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 1 week ago

    Kessler syndrome, here we come.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    What weapons, has this been interdependently verified? Doesn't seem either is known by this article so for now just take it with a grain of salt.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago

    Big grain of salt.

    Russia and China have kept to kinetic test attacks, and I can only assume the US would do the same. For years everyone sent cameras up and brought them down to develop the film. I would guess that sending a remote-triggered rifle with a few rounds has happened since the 60s.

    Don't have to be complicated to work.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 week ago
    [–] 5 points 1 week ago (8 children)

    I mean, it’s not like a bunch of Starlink satellites couldn’t be a weapon if you really wanted them to be. Adjust course just enough and boom, no more target.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 week ago (6 children)

    Starlink satellites are in LEO, and in order to hit anything in a higher orbit, would need way too much delta-V for the amount of propellant that they carry. Otherwise you'd need to be very lucky to have one within striking distance when a launched object crosses the LEO boundary.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 child)

    Was bound to happen. Honestly surprised it took this long.

    Meink did not provide specifics on the weapons and, when asked to expand, refused to provide additional details.

    Aww, was hoping for some broad strokes. If I had to guess, they focus on anti-satellite arms. Small missile launchers and lasers come to mind. (lasers work significantly better in space, though getting the power and cooling for them is much harder)

    Edit: I just remembered a notable part of Golden Dome is to have ballistic missile protection in the mid-course phase, which necessitates the interceptors loitering in space.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 week ago

    Just in time for the end of the world. Trump is an enemy of not just America but of humanity.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago*

    So if you carry a US smartphone, you can be targeted from space.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    The US deployed weapons in space decades ago.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago* (6 children)

    It's worthless. What are you gonna do throw solar panels?

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago* (5 children)

    What are you gonna do throw solar panels?

    You don't need anything near that destructive. Even tiny grains intercepting other satellites at orbital speed will destroy them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    And the concept (hopefully just a concept) of Rods from God is terrifying.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • If you want to know what's terrifying it's that Musk has the technology and capability to make it a reality today. The Starship rocker could deliver the rods to orbit and the fins and targeting systems used by the boosters for their landings could ensure they hit 'close enough' to their intended targets.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago

    Not so much a matter of if as when. Sure, small things traveling quickly can do a lot of damage, but getting them to move quickly either takes a lot of force or a lot of time. Weapons generally aren’t things you want to wait weeks or months to see a result from firing at your target for.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 1 point 1 week ago
    load more comments
    view more: next ›