There already is.
Thank you, Zylon. I knew that already. And I’ve already ascertained that nobody paid a lick of attention to my initial point.
But I appreciate the link.
-xtien
No, not really. If you were defining the organizational structure, you’d have a single unified multi-component force, because there is no longer any case where a one-dimensional force can be effective. The Army needs air support, and constantly fights with the Air Force over how to get it, because the Air Force wants to play with fighter jets instead. So the Army ends up buying and maintaining and flying their own aircraft. The Air Force needs mobile deployable airfields rather than fixed forward ones, and we have those things, but they’re called aircraft carriers and they belong to the Navy, and only the Navy pilots get to fly from those things. So now both the Air Force and the Navy buy, maintain, and fly fighter jets and other aircraft. The Marine Corps does more or less the same things that the Army does, only on a smaller scale, but they have their own aircraft, too, because they don’t want to rely on the Navy or the Army or the Air Force when the shit hits the fan. The Air Force needs to protect their airfields, so they field their own security forces, basically performing the same functions the Army of the Marines are doing. It’s all turf protection and pissing contests based on nothing but history. A Space Force just adds to the infighting and inefficiency and duplicated missions.
No, I don’t dismiss it out of hand. I dismiss it because 1) it’s the wrong solution, and 2) because the idea is actually comical. We barely have a space program. We have no manned space capability, no vehicles or launch platforms or orbital platforms. We have nothing. We can sometimes launch our own satellites, and we’ve got warhead carriers to burn, but they’re useless for anything other than incinerating the planet. What is a Space Force supposed to do? Where is their budget? The whole thing is a joke, a bit of Trump propaganda with not an ounce of thought behind it. That’s why the DOD and Congress are basically ignoring it.
Once again, Scott, with all due respect, you’re kind of making my point. My initial point. Honestly, look at what I said. You say, as most of us liberals do…
And then you follow in the very next sentence with…
My point is we don’t debate these things reasonably because an idiot has proposed it. But then you bring up good points that could steer us closer to a decent solve.
Your points about actual Space Force might be useful points, but my initial point is that liberals like me tend to say, “Space Force? What an idiot!” When eliminating exactly the things you’re talking about in favor of empowering and funding NASA to take care of it, or creating an agency to take care of it, is worthy of debate.
This is patently untrue. The first part is close to true, but “We have nothing.” when it comes to space is simply not true. So I think it’s a good idea to take his goofy titled Space Force to enhance that, because, for the third time, we’d be crippled without the informational infrastructure we gain from space. Not protecting it seems rather short-sighted. If it takes his administration’s goofy idea, and saying, “Well, then, we need to have a space program goofball.” Then fine. I don’t care who gets the credit. I just know having a space program is worthwhile.
Having the debate is part of the point.
But because it’s Trump, and I have the temerity to suggest that someone in his administration might have a good idea every once in a while that we should discuss, it gets this kind of treatment.
Still, at least we’re discussing it. But it takes me bringing it up and being told what I’m doing is tantamount to dismissing NATO to make that happen. And I’m a liberal.
It’s no wonder conservatives don’t want to contribute so much here.
-xtien
I mean we can’t even launch our own shit into space. I’m not sure how we’re supposed to have a Space Force.
“Hey Russia, want to help put weapon systems we’d probably use against you into orbit?”
We can’t fund fricken NASA. Let’s start there and then worry about some magical space army that we can’t get out of the atmosphere.
Yes we can. And we do.
That’s my point. Rather than wasting time making fun of “magical space army” say, “Hey. You want your Space Force? Guess what…we need to fund our space program to even make that possible.”
Please. Please pay attention to my initial point. “Space Force” was just an example, and everybody has gone down the rabbit hole. My point was that we cannot give an inch on what could be a good idea that deserves debate because the guy in the White House does not deserve our trust.
-xtien
You may have to consider the possibility that you articulated your point catastrophically poorly.
I understood it. I also understand the frustration that sets in whenever Debate Squad pounces.
Same. It was perfectly clear.
This is Trump’s fault.
I sincerely believe that, if there was a sudden sincere need for manned space flight, it would happen real fast. Even if it was SpaceX that did it. Just because we aren’t doing it right now, for whatever reason, doesn’t mean we couldn’t.
I think this point is spot on, Rich. Although I don’t know what “sudden sincere need for manned space flight” means outside of an asteroid the size of Texas headed toward us. I’m not just saying that as a joke. I think I’m hard wired to think we have a sincere need for manned space flight right now, and not just because someone very close to me deals with rovers on Mars almost every day.
Your point that just because we aren’t doing it right now doesn’t mean we couldn’t is very well taken. I just think that not waiting until there is a crisis to test that wouldn’t be such a bad thing.
-xtien
If there really were a life-threatening asteroid headed towards us, manned space flight would not be the solution. The solution would involve a robot, just like the one on Mars.
For the foreseeable future, the only practical use for manned space flight is to inspire people to learn about and support science.
Well, there are essentially 3 astro/cosmonauts on the ISS right now who may have to abandon station if we can’t get a non-expired return capsule to them in the next few months.
Plus, we’re just letting the plot of Rendezvous with Rama fly right on past us… ;)
To dismiss something out of hand is not the same as to dismiss it after due consideration. I’ve just listed the good reasons to dismiss it which have nothing to do with what an idiot.
Well, if you don’t want people to pay particular attention to one example, how about another? I don’t say there are no good Trump ideas given short shrift because Trump, but I can’t think of one offhand.
I’m not nearly so optimistic. I recall reading some years ago about how we’d basically discarded the designs for Saturn V rockets, etc, and how if we decided to go to the moon again we probably could not do it inside ten years. I don’t think much has changed since that assessment, but maybe I’m wrong.
I agree. I shouldn’t have equated the two. I did try to say that you give some decent reasons for dismissal of the idea, but I should not have equated those two things.
-xtien