SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
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.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by jcross on Wednesday December 28 2016, @04:54PM
Yeah if the purpose of this type of system were actually missile defense, you'd have a great point, but my guess is the purpose is to transfer something north of $30 billion from taxpayers to the military-industrial complex. Reagan already showed us that it doesn't even need to wind up working to accomplish that.
On that note, is anyone else disturbed by all the anti-Russian and anti-Chinese sentiments flying around lately? Seems like with Iraq, Afghanistan, and the "war on terror" all winding down (i.e. ongoing but apparently not very newsworthy), another menace is needed to justify massive defense spending. This smells an awful lot like the Cold War to me, except without referring much to Communism vs. Capitalism, and with a strange new alignment of US partisan politics on the issue. I guess Russia and China both seem to have some expansionist desires, so that might prove to be an excuse for war. Not that most Americans actually care much about the independence of the Crimea, or some rock in the South China Sea, or even Taiwan for that matter, but like containment you know?
(Score: 2) by takyon on Wednesday December 28 2016, @04:56PM
China is an actual threat. Russia isn't. Trump is right about that much, even if he doesn't know why.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday December 28 2016, @05:57PM
The fact one is disturbed by the reality doesn't make it easier for the one to survive that reality, especially when the reality is disturbing So why would I?
Terrorism is a good scare for NewYorkers, LAsians and so on. Not the ones which delivered White House to Trump - too spread geographically, much more self reliant for a terrorist to try something meaningful. Instinctively, they know they aren't at risk So Trump must find a proper stick to scare them and the scapegoat for the daily two minutes of hate (and the latter cannot be the banksters or those moving the capital around the world, Trump may be crazy but he's not that stupid to attack the hand that is going to feed his "public infrastructure projects"). Given the restrictions, what other choices do qualify?
You reckon? This would be a rational "don't care", but rationality is something I'd refrain from accusing those who elected Trump.
I wouldn't be surprised to hear justifications on the line of "Philippines were our protectorate, how dare those job-stealing Chinese steal that one too [time.com]?" I suspect the Trump voters have a higher sense of ownership (and a higher pain in seeing what they thought a stable ownership evaporating) than big-city dwellers.
One thing Trump said is true: the American dream is dead (has been dead for a decade, he's just the one to say it publicly). He'll masquerade "making America great again" but at no times he promised to make the Americans great (or even just back into middle-class).
The Americans can expect "We gonna win so much you may even get tired of winning and you'll say please, please Mr. president, It's too much winning! We can't take it anymore!" [youtube.com]. I can believe it will happen - except for a minor semantic detail: the "we" that will be winning won't necessary include the "you" that will be getting tired.
Is it disturbing? I'd say it is. But... does it worth to be disturbed?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by jcross on Wednesday December 28 2016, @06:35PM
Well this stirring of the pot isn't just coming from Trump supporters, as described here:
https://theintercept.com/2016/12/10/anonymous-leaks-to-the-washpost-about-the-cias-russia-beliefs-are-no-substitute-for-evidence/ [theintercept.com]
From my haphazard view of the news, it seems Trump is pushing an anti-China agenda while the democrats are pushing an anti-Russia agenda, but I could be mistaken about the trends.
(Score: 2) by jelizondo on Wednesday December 28 2016, @08:01PM
As George Carlin [youtu.be] put it: it's called the American Dream 'cos you have to be asleep to believe it!