Trump Space Force

Well... what did Former President Obama do for it?

By cancelling the shuttle without a replacement anywhere near ready? By forcing US astronauts to ride to space on russian rockets for the first time in history, because we could no longer put them up there ourselves? By cancelling plans nearly a decade in the making to return to the moon?

Obama GUTTED the space program. Sorry if the facts don't back your hero worshipping bullshit.

"I've thought a lot about it, but I don't have a strong opinion. The idea of a space force is not fundamentally odd when you consider that the Army, 70 years ago, birthed the Air Force. There was the Army Air Force. And once we realized that technology and war-fighting capabilities evolve [and were going to take place up] in the air space rather in the ground space, then it was sensible to suggest that perhaps this should be an entire branch of the military unto itself. We as a nation have assets in space of incalculable value. And so when you think about what a military does, as a minimum they would protect a nation's interests and a nation's assets, so, it's not a weird idea to say we perhaps should have a Space Force." - Neil Degrasse Tyson

But you're totally right.. literally NOBODY takes it seriously.

Put the celebrity endorsement aside for a second and talk seriously for a moment.

We have a navy because from the sea, we can supply front lines with commercial and industrial supply shipping and float heavy guns to launch artillery bombardments. Very important to control the waters, so we have a navy.

We have an air force because from the air, we can supply landlocked strategic assets with commercial and industrial supply shipping and fly rocketry to launch artillery bombardments. Very important to control the skies, so we have an air force.

Now, finish this sentence: from space, we can _______.

From space, we can surveil nearly any location on earth. We can nearly instantaneously communicate with military or civilian forces on the other side of the planet. We can detect nuclear launches from nations with ICBMs pointed at our major cities. We can locate enemy fleets and armies that would otherwise be hidden from our military. We can develop new technology that puts us ahead of our adversaries. We can use sub-orbital flights and launches to achieve incredible speeds in case of a crisis. And we can deny any nation all of the above.

Are you really so dense as to think the space force is about putting men in uniforms up in space with laser guns? It's about SATELLITES and MISSILES.

Everything you've mentioned can be done, and in most cases already is done, by current assets already in place.

Everything the air force was doing throughout most of the early cold war was being done already by the US Army Air Forces in the 40's. Does that mean it was nonsense to create a dedicated air force?

The Pentagon isn't buying it and neither is congress.

And counter-satellite warfare is already handled very happily by the air force.

So the Space Force initiative amounts to little more than creating a new office for the sake of creating a new office, adding no new strategic capability to the United States whatsoever.

Are you hearing it yet? Are you hearing how ridiculous this entire charade is?

Sounds like the arguments they made back in the 40s about how the army was handling air warfare and there was no point in making a dedicated Air Force. What a joke. Are you hearing how ridiculous your entire argument is? For that matter, why bother with a coast guard when the navy handles the water anyways? You know, f**k it. We might as well just have the army do everything. They can learn to sail ships, right? And I mean, they landed on the beaches of Normandy.. why do we need Marines?

You're comparing the known strategic value of the air force in September 1947 and the known value of amphibious logistics in 1834 with today's speculation on possible space capabilities that maybe someday more than two countries will care about. I'm going to go ahead and call bullshit on that premise.

(The US Marines are still organized from within the Navy, by the way; if you're interested, to this day, the US Coast Guard is expected to transfer organizational command to the Navy in times of warfare although this has only happened during the two World Wars.)

Possible space capabilities? I suppose you haven't been paying any attention for the last 30 years, but let me remind you: Desert Storm was such a resounding victory in large part due to our push going through a part of the desert the Iraqi Army thought was impossible to cross. We were able to do it largely because of GPS. Our wars in the middle east and our world-renowned special forces have benefited GREATLY from satellite reconnaissance. Our intelligence community has done absolute wonders using satellite communications, and we have PROVEN that we can shoot down missiles and satellites. You are literally throwing a tantrum trying to scrape for any reason you can use to oppose this simply because of whose initiative it is. You're a petulant child.

Oh, and by the way, nearly every major military power today has wet their feet in the realm of space warfare. If you really think it's just us and the Russians you're still living in the 1980s. Grow up.

Possible space capabilities? We did all that without a "Space Force". And we can continue to do so. Your "Space Force" is just Rocky Jones nonsense.

"You're comparing the known strategic value of the air force in September 1947 and the known value of amphibious logistics in 1834 with today's speculation on possible space capabilities that maybe someday more than two countries will care about. I'm going to go ahead and call bullshit on that premise."

You just argued that very same f**king premise in the post I hit the reply link on!

"And counter-satellite warfare is already handled very happily by the air force"

Why not then also say "and air warfare was already handled very happily by the army", or "and sea-going warfare was already handled very happily by the army"?

At this point you're just arguing for the sake of being contradictory.