Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Wednesday December 28 2016, @03:28PM   Printer-friendly
from the may-you-live-in-interesting-times dept.

The LA Times (archive.fo) reports that the latest National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) includes changes that could lead to the deployment of weapons in space:

President Obama has signed legislation that, by striking a single word from longstanding U.S. nuclear defense policy, could heighten tensions with Russia and China and launch the country on an expensive effort to build space-based defense systems. The National Defense Authorization Act, a year-end policy bill encompassing virtually every aspect of the U.S. military, contained two provisions with potentially momentous consequences.

One struck the word "limited" from language describing the mission of the country's homeland missile defense system. The system is designed to thwart a small-scale attack by a non-superpower such as North Korea or Iran. A related provision calls for the Pentagon to start "research, development, test and evaluation" of space-based systems for missile defense. Together, the provisions signal that the U.S. will seek to use advanced technology to defeat both small-scale and large-scale nuclear attacks. That could unsettle the decades-old balance of power among the major nuclear states.

[...] Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), who introduced and shepherded the policy changes in the House, said he drew inspiration from President Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative of the 1980s, which was intended to use lasers and other space-based weaponry to render nuclear weapons "impotent and obsolete." Known as "Star Wars," the initiative cost taxpayers $30 billion, but no system was ever deployed.

Other NDAA changes include a 2.1% pay raise for enlisted service members and officers, a boost of 16,000 more service members (to 476,000), restructuring of Tricare, and the final nail in the coffin for the Obama Administration's promise to close detention facilities at Guantanamo Bay. The bill also elevates the United States Cyber Command to the combatant command level, instead of a sub-unit of the Strategic Command, and addresses the recent National Guard bonus fiasco by requiring the Pentagon to prove that an individual soldier "did not accept their enlistment bonus in good faith", while allowing those who did make repayments to get a refund.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Informative) by ikanreed on Wednesday December 28 2016, @04:13PM

    by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday December 28 2016, @04:13PM (#446736) Journal

    It's congress, actually.

    That's the worst thing about politics in the US, we all collectively know to hate the federal government, but generally want to pin things on presidents that were 100% totally congress' fault.

    That's not to say presidents don't have power and responsibility: Bush totally did push the Iraq war and it wouldn't have happened if not for him.. Obama totally did sign the DREAM act replacement executive orders. Reagan absolutely appointed the people who ran Iran-Contra and failed to oversee them.

    But when a law is passed, it's not the fucking executive branch that should draw your ire(unless there was a tie in the senate and the vice president voted for it, I guess). I'm sure we could get into the bullshit about what's veto-worthy or not, where it comes to funding the entire US military for years at a time(hell, I'd probably agree with what you're about to say), but make sure to remember that congress are the ones who write, modify, and pass these steaming turds.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Informative=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 28 2016, @04:28PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 28 2016, @04:28PM (#446741)

    remember that congress are the ones who write, modify, and pass these steaming turds.

    And not only that, they are the ones who are out front-and-center all the time grandstanding about how "broken" Washington is and how it needs to be fixed. And their constituents are either too ignorant, or just don't care and swallow the hypocrisy.

  • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Wednesday December 28 2016, @06:52PM

    by Thexalon (636) on Wednesday December 28 2016, @06:52PM (#446790)

    If the president should have vetoed something, and didn't, then you're damn straight you should blame him. You should of course also blame Congress. This isn't an either-or situation.

    However, I should point out that the regular refrain from the Democratic Party is to dodge responsibility by denying their own power. "There's nothing we could do, the Republicans did that!" sees to be their mantra. Most of the time, when they make that claim, they're lying: They either were too timid to do the thing they could do, or agree with the policy behind closed doors. For example, Obama could have closed Gitmo years ago, by doing the following: 1. Order the military to transport each prisoner to wherever we picked them up. 2. If the government there objects, then turn them over to that government instead of just dropping them off.

    --
    The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
    • (Score: 2) by ikanreed on Wednesday December 28 2016, @07:04PM

      by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday December 28 2016, @07:04PM (#446797) Journal

      And trap sprung on an unsuspecting ideologue.

      It was vetoed by Obama and overridden by congress [govtrack.us].

      Oops, you're just wrong, and I wanted to see you sally forth from your castle to attack the other side, regardless of the facts. So congrats on hating Obama for not doing exactly what he did do.

      • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Wednesday December 28 2016, @07:43PM

        by Thexalon (636) on Wednesday December 28 2016, @07:43PM (#446816)

        Oops, you're just wrong, and I wanted to see you sally forth from your castle to attack the other side, regardless of the facts.

        Actually, you're the one who is flat wrong, on 2 counts:

        1. You cited the wrong bill's history, namely last years' bill. Here's this year's NDAA [govtrack.us], signed on Dec 23, 2016 by Barack Obama, with not a single veto in sight. Obama could have said no, and didn't. And sure, he might have been overridden after he said no, but that doesn't change the fact that he absolutely agreed to it.

        2. You made a second mistake when you suggested that my goal is attack the "other side", regardless of the facts. In this case, I specifically said to blame both the Republican-dominated Congress and President Obama, because both were involved.

        --
        The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.