What do you guys think about The Space Force?

Jump to Last Post 1-9 of 9 discussions (42 posts)
  1. Credence2 profile image80
    Credence2posted 20 months ago

    President Trump lastest addition to the armed forces sounds a bit superfluous to me.

    Wow, we already have airmen, seamen, soldiers, marines and now, Space Cadets?

    I don't see why between, NASA and the U.S Air Force, we can't obtain sufficient coverage protecting resources, mostly orbiting objects in near Earth space at this time.

    I don't know why Mr. Trump believed that we needed this, so how much does all of this going to cost?

    Your thoughts?

    Here is a little background....

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/white-house- … 19018.html

    1. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      I don't know that NASA is armed at all and they are certainly not any branch of the military.  If we don't need a military presence in space we will in the future.  Sad, but true.

      You don't know why Trump believes we need it so how much does it cost?  Not sure what you're saying here, but without a pretty firm proposal on just what is being asked for I'm positive you understand as well as anyone that there are no cost figures available.  But...might it be possible to divert resources from the other branches to fund it?  Do we need additional military might in space?

      1. Credence2 profile image80
        Credence2posted 20 months agoin reply to this

        "If we don't need a military presence in space we will in the future"

        But, from the our level of engagement in space today, it must be considerably well into the future.

        Can we afford to divert resources from the other branches, as Trump says, the increased military spending is needed to enhance what we already have?

        We barely have acquired our launch vehicle since the shuttle and any manned presence outside the atmosphere at any one time is minuscule.
        The question is do we need additional military might in space? It harkens  back to the era of Star Wars, that technology is no more viable now than it was then.

        I can't imagine in what form it would take....

        1. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 20 months agoin reply to this

          "But, from the our level of engagement in space today, it must be considerably well into the future."

          It might be.  Or it might be tomorrow.  Or it might be today - we just don't know yet that we are being "engaged" because we have nothing there to detect it.  Should we wait until the bombs fall or the lasers take out our satellites to begin building?

          If we don't need it and buy it anyway we've wasted money.  If we DO need it and don't buy it we don't exist, at least in the form we do now.  Which seems preferable?

          1. Credence2 profile image80
            Credence2posted 20 months agoin reply to this

            that's, ok, wilderness, we are going to  need to enhance shields against volleys of photon torpedoes

            1. wilderness profile image96
              wildernessposted 20 months agoin reply to this

              For all I know, we will (photon torpedoes = laser beam).  Of course I don't have the information resources at my disposal that the president does.

    2. Ken Burgess profile image91
      Ken Burgessposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      Forward thinking, projecting, anticipating potential problems and threats.

      Funny, while our generation would likely be able to survive just fine if satellites and all that they support internet, cell phones, etc. stopped working, I don't think those under-30 types would know how to exist.

      Essentially all advances and most devices in hospitals, communications, government recordkeeping of the last 25 years could be wiped out, and it might result in a mini-dark-ages for civilization.

      And if you think about it, once the over-40 generations are gone, there essentially will be no pre-computer, pre-cellphone, pre-internet types alive to handle such a collapse if it were to occur.

      Essentially, a 'Space Force' that might be able to prevent such a collapse could be critical to civilizations survival in the not-to-distant future.

      Or we could be developing the opposite, and helping bring 'Sky-Net' to life and bringing the movie that made Arnold famous to reality.

      Who knows?

      1. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 20 months agoin reply to this

        Could be wrong, but suspect that if the entire internet went down so would an awful lot of infrastructure.  Power, water, sewage treatment.  Traffic lights, airports, etc.

        But something to consider - what if the GPS satellites are taken down?  We depend on those (and so does the military) for a great deal that will suddenly end.  Is there anyone on an aircraft carrier, for instance, that can navigate by the stars anymore?

      2. Credence2 profile image80
        Credence2posted 20 months agoin reply to this

        This is true, but another branch of the Armed Forces has to created to deal with it ? still sounds like a bit much. Do we not have overlapping infrastructure to deal with this now?  When I think of Space Force, I am reminded of "Starship Troopers" or something. The Air Force in concert wi h many intelligence agencies should provide coverage for these issues. While I am not the expert, The President needs to explain to the people more explicitly what this all about.

    3. Live to Learn profile image80
      Live to Learnposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      This isn't Trump's idea. I was in Colorado when the first base for the Space Force was labeled such. That was in 1982.

      1. GA Anderson profile image91
        GA Andersonposted 20 months agoin reply to this

        That was an effective prod Live to learn, boy, am I late to the party. Thanks.

        You were right! For the lazy folks, here is a timeline of what that first base sparked:


        GA

      2. Credence2 profile image80
        Credence2posted 20 months agoin reply to this

        Thanks for the additional info...

    4. promisem profile image98
      promisemposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      Illegal aliens from outer space are even scarier than the ones from Mexico. Especially if they have laser guns.

      Otherwise, true Republicans oppose more government cost and bloat for something that is easily handled by our Air Force.

      We don't need more wasteful spending at a time when the massive tax cut is skyrocketing the national debt.

      1. GA Anderson profile image91
        GA Andersonposted 20 months agoin reply to this

        Hi promisem, what if that "wasteful spending" was mostly a consolidation of current spending? Check out the Google search I posted to Credence2. "Space Command" (Space Force?) Google search

        GA

        1. promisem profile image98
          promisemposted 20 months agoin reply to this

          Hello, GA. That's a good question. My response has two parts:

          1. It's still yet another agency, which goes against Republican principles of streamlining government and Trump's promise to drain the swamp.

          2. New agencies, business departments or any other organizational creation always requires at least some additional administrative cost.

          If Trump can show compelling need rather than a political ploy to appeal to his base, then so be it.

          1. GA Anderson profile image91
            GA Andersonposted 20 months agoin reply to this

            I understand your points promisem, although I hadn't brought 'party' into the discussion, so I will leave that part to you.

            My first comment noted I knew no more about this issue than Credence2's link provided. At that point I simply asked a couple clarifying questions.

            Then I took a shallow Google dive, and was surprised how much was already in the works for this issue, (some as early as 1982), and how uninformed about it I am.

            Regarding your "another agency" thought, normally I would agree, but after finding out how many different 'groups' are already involved, I am wondering if a consolidation of efforts might not be a smart choice. Maybe not a completely new agency, but maybe something like a spin-off branch based on the already existing Air Force Space command. It's just a thought.

            I think history proves you are right that more money will be needed, but at least now I am not looking at that thought as if it would be the cost of creating a whole new thing, "Space Force," out of thin air.

            As for Pres. Trump's motivations and methods - who knows, but ... there does seem to be some firm, and established  ground for the idea. I just think tossing it out there as the creation of a new "Space Force" was an open invitation for target practice.

            GA

            1. promisem profile image98
              promisemposted 20 months agoin reply to this

              GA, just to be clear, my point about party is not an accusation but a point in favor of Republican philosophy in this case. I believe more federal agencies should be a last resort.

              I spent decades at the corporate level working in an industry that underwent constant change with departments and operating units being bounced around exactly like we are discussing here.

              It didn't matter where the operations ended up. They didn't get better. They simply had different challenges. We wasted a lot of time, energy and money on the moves that could have better been used elsewhere.

              Again to be clear, my comment about a political ploy was not an accusation but just an observation. It doesn't matter who is in office. They all make these administrative moves as much for political reasons as anything else.

              1. GA Anderson profile image91
                GA Andersonposted 20 months agoin reply to this

                Got it.

                GA

      2. Credence2 profile image80
        Credence2posted 20 months agoin reply to this

        My point exactly, Promisem.

    5. GA Anderson profile image91
      GA Andersonposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      Hey Cred, just to spur your thoughts, look what this  Google search brought up:



      Maybe a consolidation effort isn't such a bad idea.

      ""SPAAAAAACE FOOOOOOOORCE!!!"  Build the wall! Build the... I mean, space force, space force, space force!!!

      GA

      1. Ken Burgess profile image91
        Ken Burgessposted 20 months agoin reply to this

        In the Space Force, you can sail into the sky!
        In the Space Force, you never need ask why!
        In the space force, you can fly over foreign Lands!
        In the Space Force! In the Space Force!
        They want you, they want you, they want you as a new recruit!

        In the report, “A Day Without Space: Economic and National Security Ramifications,” Ed Morris, the Executive Director of the Office of Space Commerce at the Department of Commerce, writes:

        "If you think it is hard to get work done when your internet connection goes out at the office, imagine losing that plus your cell phone, TV, radio, ATM access, credit cards, [and GPS]. "

        1. Credence2 profile image80
          Credence2posted 20 months agoin reply to this

          Yeah, Ken "Space Cadets"......

      2. Credence2 profile image80
        Credence2posted 20 months agoin reply to this

        Thanks for foraging for this stuff, GA. I think that consolidation and better coordination between these agency will move us in the right direction.

  2. FatFreddysCat profile image96
    FatFreddysCatposted 20 months ago

    SPAAAAAACE FOOOOOOOORCE!!!

    https://youtu.be/NI6ygeZxUBA

  3. IslandBites profile image86
    IslandBitesposted 20 months ago

    "The time has come to establish the United States Space Force."

    Build the wall! Build the... I mean, space force, space force, space force!!!

  4. Credence2 profile image80
    Credence2posted 20 months ago

    Here are some of the arguments for and against the Space Force. You all can decide which is important to you, for me the cons outweigh the pros

    PROS

    Adversaries’ counter-satellite capabilities: Both China and Russia have worked in recent years to develop anti-satellite capabilities. Both countries’ ground-to-space missile programs may soon be able strike U.S. satellites as they orbit around the Earth. Given U.S. reliance on satellite transmissions for communications, reconnaissance, and GPS, attacks on America’s roughly 120 military satellites could hinder U.S. warfighting on the ground. It may serve U.S. interests to devote an entire military branch to protecting America’s space assets.

    Preparing to fight wars of the future: The satellite problem presents a problem for the now, but major wars of the future could be won or lost above Earth’s atmosphere. China has formed its own Space Force-style military arm of the People’s Liberation Army – the Strategic Support Force (SSF). The SSF thus far has managed China’s anti-satellite tactics, including satellite-to-satellite weapons, but it’s possible that a future war could potentially involve space-to-ground bombardment. If space warfighting ever reached that level of intensity, the United States would want a branch to handle defense posture in orbit.

    Space program grew U.S. economy: Reinvigorated space development would probably continue America’s remarkable economic growth. Government spending on space programs could be viewed as an investment rather than a burden on U.S. taxpayers. A study from the early days of the U.S. space program found that $25 billion in space spending turned into $52 billion in economic gains. The study predicted that gain would turn to $181 billion in economic returns a decade later.

    CONS

    Bureaucratic overlap: Many in the Defense Department believe that the Air Force currently and sufficiently handles U.S. space military concerns. The branch has tens of thousands of personnel dedicated to defending America’s space interests, and the relative lack of an overwhelming, clear, and present danger emanating from space means that the Trump administration may be creating an entirely unnecessary federal bureaucracy.

    Arms control: Stretching back to the Cold War, the world’s major powers have attempted to keep space weapons-free. But the creation of national military space units could spark a new arms race beyond Earth’s atmosphere. Most of the world’s countries, including the United States, Russia, and China, are members of the Outer Space Treaty, which prohibits weapons of mass destruction in space. Militarization of the expanse could lead to countries abandoning the terms, or even simply the spirit, of the agreement and placing potentially devastating weapons in orbit.

    1. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      1.  That military spending will result in a better economy is a red herring: ANY spending boosts the economy.  It is not a reason to build a war machine.

      2.  That there is no "overwhelming, clear, and present danger emanating from space" is about the silliest reason possible for not providing protection there.  Once an "overwhelming danger" IS there it is too late to do anything.

      1. Credence2 profile image80
        Credence2posted 20 months agoin reply to this

        So, may I presume that the idea of creating a new division of the armed forces is not palatable for you?

        I think that the political challenge is almost a daunting as the technical ones. Putin is no dummy, he would never allow a Star Wars kind of defense idea, giving America protection in the case its chooses a first strike option. Some sort of reconciliation would be in order

        1. Live to Learn profile image80
          Live to Learnposted 20 months agoin reply to this

          I worked on the Space defense initiative back in the 80's. The Space Command was formed in 82 so none of this is new.

          If you think Putin isn't diligently working to find offense and defense in space you might be naive.

          1. Credence2 profile image80
            Credence2posted 20 months agoin reply to this

            I am impressed

            I am aware that we have to prepare for assaults from all directions, but creating a separate branch in the armed forces rather than enhancing existing agencies trained to do this is wasteful. Trump needs to explain the necessity of such a move outside of his just "saying so".

  5. Sam Montana profile image75
    Sam Montanaposted 20 months ago

    It is a shame that in the second, almost the third decade of the 21st century, this planet still has to spend so much money on war, offense and defense. If something like this protects the Earth against meteors, asteroids or comets hitting the Earth, fine, since that could destroy all life. But more money for the military is really hurting countries.

    Of course, just one huge solar flare or lone wolf terrorist could take down the internet.

    1. Credence2 profile image80
      Credence2posted 20 months agoin reply to this

      Man and his fundamental nature is incorrigible. What would it take for the planet to be at total peace, perhaps if the Vulcans decide to call on us?

  6. GA Anderson profile image91
    GA Andersonposted 20 months ago

    Good topic Cred.

    After reading through the comments - so far, it looks like there are two questions:

    Are we talking about a "Star Ship Troopers-type" of force, with all the sci-fi and ridicule provoking mental images that it would and is provoking, ("SPAAAAAACE FOOOOOOOORCE!!!"), or a dedicated force, (like the Air Force's Space Command), with a defined primary mission - similar to the Coast Guard vs. Navy arrangement?

    I wonder which of these were the President's thoughts?

    Secondly, I think your topic also asks the question of whether there is a need for such protection?

    After only reading your link I will offer my uninformed opinion. I completely agree that we need such protection, and now. I also think that focusing on developing and expanding the capabilities of this type of protection should be a priority - now.

    But, and again this is an uninformed view, I would lean to this new "Space Force" being a task for the Air Force - an expansion of their current Space Command division. If it must be a separate force, I think a spin-off from that Air Force division, (again the Coast Guard vs. Navy model), would be the best choice.

    Politically, and without knowing the context of the President's initial announcement, I think he handed his detractors a supply of darts; "SPAAAAAACE FOOOOOOOORCE!!!"  Build the wall! Build the... I mean, space force, space force, space force!!!

    I think I will look into the Air Force's Space Command. Maybe we are already secretly training Star Ship Troopers. ;-)

    GA

    1. IslandBites profile image86
      IslandBitesposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      Speaking to troops in San Diego on Tuesday, President Trump called outer space "a war-fighting domain," and floated the idea of adding a "space force" to the U.S. military.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lrJhatw3K4


      Im sorry, I remembered this lol

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AUXpnB065o

      1. GA Anderson profile image91
        GA Andersonposted 20 months agoin reply to this

        Hi there Islandbites,

        Relative to your first link, I can only sarcastically say "Gee Thanks!" I was trying not to have that information. I liked the possibilities of this discussion without it.

        And your second link ... another Gee thanks! I chuckled and smiled all the way through it, and then fell into the hole of more schmoyoho efforts. Wasted 20 minutes already, and still going back for more.


        GA

        1. IslandBites profile image86
          IslandBitesposted 20 months agoin reply to this

          You're welcome? lol

    2. Credence2 profile image80
      Credence2posted 20 months agoin reply to this

      Hi, GA, I though that I would have a little fun with this.

      So, you have seen Starship Troopers, wasn't it a hoot?

      I agree that our vulnerabities in this area demands our immediate attention. I just say that we can beef up existing portions of our defense establishment without the need for a totally new bureaucracy. So what about the Air Force space command? There is no reason why additional resources as needed could not bring us up to speed.

      1. GA Anderson profile image91
        GA Andersonposted 20 months agoin reply to this

        I have to admit I have seen that movie Cred - but, just once.

        I think the Air Force Space command does seem like the most logical first-look, but, I certainly don't know enough to go along with your "no reason ..." thought.

        Just imagine the military branch turf wars if a completely new branch were created. It will be bad enough if it's just an expansion of Air Force responsibilities.

        GA

  7. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 20 months ago

    One more win for the military /industrial /space complex .

  8. Credence2 profile image80
    Credence2posted 20 months ago

    In a way, this is too bad that we had not developed space to the point where such a new force would be warranted

    Where is the beautiful space station, rather than the erector set in orbit now?

    In the 1960s, I expected that by this time we would have lunar bases and I could have booked a vacation to the Tranquility Hilton on coach.

    This, not far from the new maximum security prison. It would have a new revolutionary open campus concept. But, I would tell the inmates that, "I would not tinker with that airlock, if I were you."

  9. IslandBites profile image86
    IslandBitesposted 20 months ago

    Trump 2020 re-election campaign manager Brad Parscale emailed supporters on Tuesday asking them to vote on a Space Force logo which will be sold later on.

    "President Trump wants a SPACE FORCE - a groundbreaking endeavour for the future of America and the final frontier," read the email from the Trump campaign.

    "As a way to celebrate President Trump's huge announcement, our campaign will be selling a new line of gear."

    Mr Parscale then asked supporters to choose from six logos, one of which includes the phrase: "Mars awaits."

    After selecting a logo, people were then asked to donate money to the Trump campaign.

    Space force!

    1. Randy Godwin profile image92
      Randy Godwinposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      Drain the swamp!  tongue

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://maven.io/company/pages/privacy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)