Results 1 to 9 of 9
Thanks Tree16Thanks
  • 3 Post By Djinn
  • 2 Post By Blueneck
  • 3 Post By labrea
  • 2 Post By johnflesh
  • 3 Post By RNG
  • 3 Post By BigLeRoy

Thread: Alternative to Trump's "Space Force"

  1. #1
    Council Member Djinn's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    46,970
    Thanks
    31270

    From
    Pennsylvania, USA

    Alternative to Trump's "Space Force"

    Trump's "Space Force" idea is simply stupid. We don't even have a government organization with the funding for a manned space shuttle, so the idea of throwing money at a "Space Force" is asinine.

    That said, if Trump is hot on developing a new branch of the military, and he wants to be smart about it, there's actually a need for one.

    We could use a "Cyber Force." Yeah, the name is terrible. It's what I can come up with on-the-spot on a Sunday morning before breakfast. But a case could be made for a branch of the military dedicated to informational warfare - both offensive and defensive. I don't like the idea of effectively announcing that we have a dedicated military branch for such things, but it's obvious to all but the self-blinded that this is the game other nations are playing - against us. And there's no reason we can't do the same - and do it better.

    Fuck "Space Force." You want to protect our military satellites? Use military-grade hackers to bypass the software being used to target them.
    Thanks from Blueneck, birdzeyez and johnflesh

  2. #2
    Shut up and vote Addiction Solitaire Champion, Double Deuce Champion, Queen Jewels Champion, Ray Ray Shuffle Champion, Twins Champion, Blow Up: Arcade Champion, Bunch - Time Trial Champion, Znax Champion, Zoo Keeper Champion, Sobics School Champion, Swap a Smiley Champion, Makos Champion, Dino Drop Champion, Flower Frenzy Champion, Some Puzzle Champion, Funny Bubbles Champion, CubeZ Champion, Dinky Smash Champion, Fun Fun Animals Champion, Fruit Fabriek Champion, Raft Wars Champion, Rainbow Monkey RunDown Champion, Raft Wars Champion, Crime Puzzle Champion Blueneck's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    50,171
    Thanks
    28597

    From
    Ohio
    Isn't this probably already something the NSA is doing?
    Thanks from johnflesh and Tedminator

  3. #3
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    36,041
    Thanks
    28667

    From
    On a hill
    Some proposed logos



    Thanks from Blueneck, Tedminator and One

  4. #4
    Shitposting Rank 4 Missle Command Champion johnflesh's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    21,745
    Thanks
    12049

    From
    Colorado
    They already exist in part, spread among the branches of the military, NSA, DHS, CIA, FBI.

    To me this would be like making a force out of people who can shoot a gun or drive a tank. "Tank Force". Those skills are essential in multiple branches/teams and for various tasks.

    However, there is a higher call for people to protect us from cyber attacks than there will ever be for a Space Force. So you have a good point.
    Thanks from Blueneck and Ian Jeffrey

  5. #5
    Ignorance Is Virtue BitterPill's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    11,233
    Thanks
    7687

    From
    SoCal
    Quote Originally Posted by Djinn View Post
    Trump's "Space Force" idea is simply stupid. We don't even have a government organization with the funding for a manned space shuttle, so the idea of throwing money at a "Space Force" is asinine.

    That said, if Trump is hot on developing a new branch of the military, and he wants to be smart about it, there's actually a need for one.

    We could use a "Cyber Force." Yeah, the name is terrible. It's what I can come up with on-the-spot on a Sunday morning before breakfast. But a case could be made for a branch of the military dedicated to informational warfare - both offensive and defensive. I don't like the idea of effectively announcing that we have a dedicated military branch for such things, but it's obvious to all but the self-blinded that this is the game other nations are playing - against us. And there's no reason we can't do the same - and do it better.

    Fuck "Space Force." You want to protect our military satellites? Use military-grade hackers to bypass the software being used to target them.
    We don't even have a deep sea force yet! I think we're getting ahead of our skis.

  6. #6
    RNG
    RNG is offline
    Moderator RNG's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    11,706
    Thanks
    7176

    From
    Between everywhere
    IMO, that money should go to NASA to increase both the current projects and allow new scientific missions.

    The Republican President recently increased their budget for going back to the moon, a project of questionable scientific or even military use, at the expense of other things like the space station. I don't understand it, unless it's in the military parade class in his mind.
    Thanks from labrea, Djinn and Ian Jeffrey

  7. #7
    Council Member Djinn's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    46,970
    Thanks
    31270

    From
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Quote Originally Posted by Blueneck View Post
    Isn't this probably already something the NSA is doing?
    To an extent; the NSA is a under the Department of Defense. But a case could be made for "militarizing" their efforts in an official sense. It might not be necessary - but it makes far more sense than Trump's "Space Force."

  8. #8
    Council Member Djinn's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    46,970
    Thanks
    31270

    From
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Quote Originally Posted by RNG View Post
    IMO, that money should go to NASA to increase both the current projects and allow new scientific missions.

    The Republican President recently increased their budget for going back to the moon, a project of questionable scientific or even military use, at the expense of other things like the space station. I don't understand it, unless it's in the military parade class in his mind.
    Not sure about "going back to the moon" unless someone can provide a really good reason for doing it. It's far cheaper to send dozens of robots or to the moon than even one or two humans.

  9. #9
    Radical Centrist BigLeRoy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    36,503
    Thanks
    32184

    From
    Colorado
    Quote Originally Posted by Djinn View Post
    Not sure about "going back to the moon" unless someone can provide a really good reason for doing it. It's far cheaper to send dozens of robots or to the moon than even one or two humans.
    We should send some robotic rovers to the South Pole of the Moon, to find out exactly how much water is there. We do know there is some there, that has been shielded from solar radiation by being in eternal shadow. If any nation ever does build a manned base on the Moon, it will almost certainly be located near the South Pole, for this reason alone. At some point, there might be a mad rush to claim real estate in that region of the Moon, with several nations racing to get there. I am actually very surprised that NASA has not already done a mission like this, because it would be an amazingly cheap mission, as NASA missions go----they could simply dust off one of the Martian rover designs, and repurpose it for the Moon.

    Later this year, China will become the first nation to land a probe on the far side of the Moon----presuming, of course, that their mission is successful.
    Thanks from Djinn, Ian Jeffrey and bajisima

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 78
    Last Post: 14th August 2018, 08:22 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10th February 2017, 08:45 AM
  3. Given "alternative facts" and the "Bowling Green Massacre"?
    By GordonGecko in forum Opinion Polls
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 3rd February 2017, 10:44 AM
  4. Trump's use of "alternative facts"
    By OHjulie in forum Current Events
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 25th January 2017, 03:31 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed