Don't get your hopes up too high about becoming a space marine quite yet. But if the House of Representatives' version of the 2018 defense budget goes through, you may soon be able to enlist in the US Space Corps.
Back in January of 2001, days before the inauguration of President George W. Bush, a commission headed by future Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld warned of a "space Pearl Harbor" and urged a reorganization of the military to put a greater emphasis on warfare in the space domain—defending US communications and intelligence satellites, and if necessary taking out the satellites of adversaries. In their report, the Commission to Assess United States National Security Space Management and Organizations told Congress, "The US is more dependent on space than any other nation... Yet the threat to the US and its allies in and from space does not command the attention it merits."
A few things happened that derailed efforts to change that perceived neglect. But now the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) has breathed new life into those old plans by including a provision in the House version of the 2018 US defense budget that would create a separate military service dedicated to the cause of space as a warfare domain: the US Space Corps. It would also create a separate joint command, the US Space Command, breaking the role out of the US Strategic Command much in the way that was done with the US Cyber Command.
Source: Ars Technica
Previously: The United States Space Corps Wants You...
Related Stories
US lawmakers have drafted legislation proposing the formation of a new branch of the military called the Space Corps. This new space-orientated military service would join the five other branches of the United States Armed Forces and is intended to manage national security in space.
Last week, the House Armed Service Committee, led by Republican Chairman Mike Rogers and Ranking Member Democrat Jim Cooper, introduced the new legislation claiming that the current national security space systems in the United States are not capable of protecting the country's space assets.
"Not only are there developments by adversaries," says Mr Rogers and Mr Cooper in the committee release, "but we are imposing upon the national security space enterprise a crippling organizational and management structure and an acquisition system that has led to delays and cost-overruns."
Although the proposal establishes the US Space Corps as its own separate military service, it would still be operated from within the Department of the Air Force, in much the same way the US Marine Corps operates from within the Department of the Navy.
Will the space lasers make a 'pew, pew!' sound?
Former NASA astronaut, test pilot, and retired USAF Colonel Terry Virts is itching for a U.S. Space Force:
During my 30 plus years in the Air Force I had the privilege of serving as a pilot for my entire active duty career, with 16 of those years in Air Force Space Command as an astronaut. And I can say unequivocally that the air and space domains are completely different and independent of each other.
[...] If space is a separate domain, worthy of its own uniformed service, what exactly should it comprise, and what would it look like? Today, not only does the Air Force have its own space component, but so does the Army and Navy as well as other government agencies. I propose combining all "title 10" (i.e. combat related forces, as opposed to "title 50" intelligence gathering forces) assets that leave the atmosphere, or return from space, in a newly formed "Space Force," reporting directly to the secretary of Defense.
[...] I believe making this change will actually save money, as duplication is eliminated. It will also improve the quality of support that the joint force commander has at his disposal, as the joint-force space component commander will be entirely focused on providing space domain support to the joint fight, and not on pleasing an Air Force (or Navy or Army) chain of command that may have conflicting priorities.
[...] The time for a new uniformed service, the Space Force, is now. America deserves the most modern, efficient, and innovative military possible, and this will be a critical element in keeping us many steps ahead of our enemies.
Previously: The United States Space Corps Wants You...
Congressional Panel Puts Plans for a US Space Corps in 2018 Defense Budget
Trump orders creation of space-focused U.S. military branch
U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday said he was ordering the creation of a sixth branch of the military to focus on space, a move critics said could harm the Air Force.
"It is not enough to merely have an American presence in space. We must have American dominance in space," Trump said before a meeting of his National Space Council. "We are going to have the Air Force and we're going to have the 'Space Force.' Separate but equal. It is going to be something," he said later.
The United States is a member of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, which bars the stationing of weapons of mass destruction in space and only allows for the use of the moon and other celestial bodies for peaceful purposes.
The idea of a Space Force has been raised before, by Trump and previous administrations, with proponents saying it would make the Pentagon more efficient. It has also faced criticism from senior military officials. Air Force Chief of Staff General David Goldfein told a 2017 congressional hearing that creating a new space branch would "move us in the wrong direction." The Air Force oversees most of the nation's space-related military activity.
The move would require the budgetary approval of the U.S. Congress, which has been divided on the idea.
President Trump orders the creation of new Starship Troopers/Space Marines memes.
We should have a separate "Space" topic on SoylentNews at this point. We are all going to be drafted to fight aliens eventually.
Also at BBC (#winning image).
Previously: The United States Space Corps Wants You...
Congressional Panel Puts Plans for a US Space Corps in 2018 Defense Budget
The Case for a U.S. Space Force
Pence unveils plan to create Space Force by 2020
Vice President Mike Pence announced the Pentagon's detailed plan for President Donald Trump's vision of a Space Force on Thursday, which would establish the first military branch in over 70 years.
[...] Pence on Thursday stressed that the new branch would be built, in part, from pre-existing elements. "The Space Force will not be built from scratch," Pence said during a speech before members of the Pentagon. "This is a critical step toward's establishing the Space Force as the sixth branch of our armed forces."
Here are the four components to the Department of Defense establishing a Space Force:
First, DoD will establish a Space Development Agency to develop and field space capabilities at speed and scale. The Air Force has already begun to transform its Space and Missile Center (SMC). The Department will accelerate and extend this transformation to all services by creating a joint Space Development Agency.
Second, the Department will develop the Space Operations Force to support the Combatant Commands. These joint space warfighters will provide space expertise to combatant commanders and the Space Development Agency, and surge expertise in time of crisis to ensure that space capabilities are leveraged effectively in conflict.
Third, the Department will create the governance, services, and support functions of the Space Force. Many of these will require changes to U.S. law. The Department will build a legislative proposal for Congressional consideration as a part of the Fiscal Year 2020 budget cycle.
Fourth, the Department will create a U.S. Space Command, led by a four star general or flag officer, to lead the use of space assets in warfighting and accelerate integration of space capabilities into other warfighting forces. U.S. Space Command will be responsible for directing the employment of the Space Force.
Will Space Development Agency research trickle down to NASA?
Previously: The United States Space Corps Wants You...
Congressional Panel Puts Plans for a US Space Corps in 2018 Defense Budget
The Case for a U.S. Space Force
President Trump Orders the Creation of a United States Space Force
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday July 05 2017, @08:41PM (32 children)
The US is a signatory to the Space Treaty [wikipedia.org] which precludes militarising space.
I'm not surprised it was Rumsfeld who pushed for this though, he has made a lot of money out of war, and could no doubt see a great opportunity to make a lot more.
(Score: 3, Funny) by DannyB on Wednesday July 05 2017, @08:42PM
A mere technicality.
Don't call it Space Corps.
Call it Space Cadets.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday July 05 2017, @08:47PM (19 children)
Honest question: hasn't the US (and every other major space capable power) already crossed the line of militarizing space?
Didn't China demonstrate an anti-satellite weapon a few years ago -- creating a cloud of debris?
Wasn't GPS originally primarily a military application of space? Isn't good satellite weather forecasting and good global weather models a military application? Aren't spy cameras a military application of space? Or are they just to spy on US citizens? And only US citizens on the beach?
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by kaszz on Wednesday July 05 2017, @09:56PM (12 children)
The red line is in essence placing or testing weapons of mass destruction in space or taking out other countries satellites.
From the Outer space treaty of 1967 [wikisource.org]:
The treaty bars countries "from placing nuclear weapons or any other weapons of mass destruction in orbit of Earth, installing them on the Moon or any other celestial body, or to otherwise station them in outer space. /../ prohibits their use for testing weapons of any kind, conducting military manoeuvers, or establishing military bases, installations, and fortifications (Art.IV)."
Dunno if spy satellites can be considered "installations". But any space corps may run into trouble with "conducting military manoeuvers" and if they stay overnight there's a "establishing military bases". This move could easily open a can of worms. The most compliant move would be to train on the ground and have a high degree of readiness. That way any adversary would have to make the first move and the US would then literally only defend themselves. For all the usual twisting of words..
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday July 05 2017, @11:27PM (11 children)
The WMD are already there. There are literally millions of kinetic weapons, just floating around up there. All that is needed are some thrusters to nudge them into intercept orbits. The WMD come in many sizes, small enough to wipe out small villages, to large enough to crack the earth's crust. Some of those weapons don't even need much of a nudge. We had a "near miss" recently, when a rather large rock passed close by, inside the orbit of the moon.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Thursday July 06 2017, @12:35AM (5 children)
And no one would know about it? covertly wiping out cities and facilities for fun and imperialism.
Just a small rocket on the side facing away from the earth.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday July 06 2017, @12:48AM (1 child)
What does anyone knowing about it have to do with anything? We see terrorist acts almost every day already. We have terror organizations taking credit for stuff that we don't even think they did. Someone wants to drop a rock on - ohhhhh, Hong Kong, or Washington, or just anywhere. At this point in time, only a few actors are capable of pushing rocks around. Given time, say another fifty years, there will be more people up there, with various allegiances to various organizations. Or, maybe even just some nutter who has lost it. As I say, some of those rocks come very close to earth anyway. Just a small nudge, and it will hit the earth. If the nudge is done far enough in advance, like a year before impact, the authorities may never figure out for sure what happened. But, most likely, half a dozen religious groups will take credit for their gods, and some terror organization will take credit for itself.
Secrets? No secrets necessary, really.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by kaszz on Thursday July 06 2017, @01:33AM
All it takes is some secret rocket launch. Even SpaceX do those for the US military. It would not be a stretch to think those capabilities will be available for more persons further ahead.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Weasley on Thursday July 06 2017, @06:29PM (2 children)
Well, we would if an asteroid with a well known orbit suddenly changed course. Maybe that's why funding Pan-STARRS [wikipedia.org] dried up.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Thursday July 06 2017, @09:43PM (1 child)
It could of course happen because another asteroid hit the first asteroid.
(Score: 2) by Weasley on Friday July 07 2017, @01:32AM
It "could". But the odds of an asteroid being hit and then promptly smashing into the Earth are mind-blowingly astronomical.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday July 06 2017, @01:55AM (4 children)
I disagree. Asteroids are no more weapons than steel is. You have to go through considerable effort to weaponize an asteroid. Currently, it's easier to build a nuclear bomb than it is to divert an asteroid onto an Earth intercept course (much less an Earth intercept that hits a particular target).
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Saturday July 08 2017, @03:21AM (3 children)
The point is not ease or cost of destruction. But stealth.
"Oops seems a random asteroid blown away your city, shit happens!"
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday July 08 2017, @04:21AM (2 children)
Still looks about the same except the stealth approach with nukes is easier and cheaper.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Saturday July 08 2017, @11:44AM (1 child)
When a nuke blows up you know foul play is present.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday July 08 2017, @01:01PM
Not necessarily. Maybe the country in question accidentally blew up a nuke. Nor do you automatically know who did what even when you have evidence of foul play (false flag operations where someone else can easily take the blame can be quite convenient). Meanwhile an asteroid strike is probably going to be treated as an attack anyway. And how many players can divert asteroids again?
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday July 05 2017, @10:03PM (5 children)
The Outer Space Treaty banned weapons of mass destruction in orbit and outer space but does not ban conventional weaponry in orbit. So any laser, shrapnell, or gun type satellite weapon is still legal under this treaty.
Then there is the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome [wikipedia.org] which any out of control geostationary satellite (like the recent one in the news) could domino into a full blown take down of every com-sat.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Wednesday July 05 2017, @11:02PM (2 children)
Almost sounds like "The China syndrome" ;-) It would be a dismal world where no satellites can exist and space travel would be extremely hazardous from a debris point of view.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday July 05 2017, @11:21PM (1 child)
It would force the development of what will be inevitable sooner or later: Some sort of de-orbit plan for this junk.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Thursday July 06 2017, @12:32AM
Which seems to require a solar powered laser satellite. Which would perhaps violate the outer space treaty. I doubt any de-orbiting on this scale can be accomplished with a one-shoot-fixes-it-all. Rather it's a long term game where re-supplies won't cut it economically.
And it could be financed on a per organization ownership of satellites.
(Score: 2) by xpda on Wednesday July 05 2017, @11:13PM (1 child)
It seems like if a geostationary satellite was hit by another satellite, it's change in velocity would force it into an elliptical orbit, almost certainly missing the other geostationary satellites for the next few thousand years. I haven't run the numbers, but it a domino effect seems impossible in our lifetime.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday July 06 2017, @12:50AM
Better minds have already looked into it and its a real possibility. Follow the link posted above. The math has already been done.
We are not talking billiard balls here.
Think fragmentation grenades!
As one comes apart and drifts into another, setting it spinning because the solar panels present the biggest targets. More parts fall off. Rinse Repeat uncontrollably.
I can't see how you come up with such certainty of an elliptical orbit that never crosses any other orbit.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4664228/A-satellite-falling-apart-Mexico.html [dailymail.co.uk]
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by LVDOVICVS on Wednesday July 05 2017, @09:17PM (4 children)
The U.S. is a signatory to the Geneva Conventions, too. The one that forbids torture, among other things.
So much for the integrity of U.S. commitments to international treaties.
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by DannyB on Wednesday July 05 2017, @09:47PM (3 children)
The U.S. does not torture. George W Bush said so. Instead, the U.S. does "enhanced interrogation" which is a kinder and gentler torture which Trump would not approve of.
Londo: . . . but we have treaties
Lord Refa: Ink on a page!
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Wednesday July 05 2017, @09:59PM (2 children)
Lord Refa: We won't torture anyone. We just beat them up and put them under a cloth soaked in water!
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 05 2017, @10:38PM (1 child)
put them under a cloth soaked in water
It sounds like you are attempting to describe waterboarding.
"Cloth" is not necessarily a prominent feature of that.
Waterboarding is the process of drowning someone slowly.
The mouth of the victim is sealed with plastic wrap or tape or several layers of a saturated towel.
Water is then poured up the nose of the victim.
Several people have poo-poo'd the notion that waterboarding is torture.
When those people allowed themselves to be subjected to the process, each called off the experiment within a tiny number of seconds. [google.com]
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Wednesday July 05 2017, @11:05PM
It was just a nudge that it's possible to abide to regulations on a superficial level. But then twist the wording and intention a long way.
(Score: 3, Informative) by frojack on Wednesday July 05 2017, @09:56PM
Militarizing space is not the same thing as having weapons and monitoring systems on earth that could reach space.
China, a signatory to this treaty you seem to place great stock in, has already demonstrated a satellite killer technology [wikipedia.org], (and made a huge mess in the process). The Russians [jalopnik.com] and the Americans [wikipedia.org] did the same, but with far less long lived space debries. Of these the only one that can be deployed in numbers in a hurry is the American version because it can be launched from F15 Eagle Fighters
The Outer Space Treaty banned weapons of mass destruction in orbit and outer space but does not ban conventional weaponry in orbit. So any shrapnell or gun type satellite weapon is still legal under this treaty.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Wednesday July 05 2017, @10:12PM (1 child)
Picture me oh-so-surprised that the US would initiate a no-weapons treaty while badly trailing (first crewed Apollo was 1968), but seem to ignore it ever bothered under the current "winning" me-myself-and-moi administration.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday July 06 2017, @01:10AM
We already had anti ballistic missiles well before anybody orbited a human.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Nike [wikipedia.org] 4 or 5 different models widely deployed with a service ceiling of up to 460 miles.
Beginning in 1953, they could hit incoming warhead. The US was smart enough to realize a point defense was never going to cut it with 50's and 60's technology because they could never counter a swarm of warheads.
The Missile Gap was born, and the US switched a massive upgrade of our own missile and MIRVS and MAD was born.
There was never any expectation on either side of there being manned missile bases in space.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 5, Informative) by ikanreed on Wednesday July 05 2017, @10:12PM (2 children)
Look, every time we get a Republican president, we disregard a major cold-war era treaty.
The OST is the sacrificial lamb for the republican administration just like the ABMT was the one for the Bush administration. In 16 years, when the public has once again forgotten that republicans are basically never right about anything, we'll elect someone to ignore the nuclear test ban treaty.
Hey, we gotta look "strong" by making meaningless gesture of military strength.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 05 2017, @11:14PM (1 child)
The point of Trump is a way for the citizens to tell the establishment "Fuck You!". Additionally to put rocks into the cogs of TTIP, silent surveillance, multiculturalism toxicity, gender nonsense, war mongering, questionable loyalty etc.
And yeah republicans seem to do a lot of insane things. Otoh democrats seem quite corrupt and ingrained with some suffocating community all inclusive thing.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by ikanreed on Wednesday July 05 2017, @11:39PM
Congratulations on that anti-establishment candidate who did all the things you hate the establishment for doing. Seriously. Great job
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 05 2017, @10:08PM (1 child)
There will be a lot of flag-rank and SES slots opening up. More budget, more minions, more golf courses.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Wednesday July 05 2017, @11:16PM
Especially golf courses, big contracts, expensive dinners, lobbying, fat paycheck positions.. Standard operating procedure. Romans were good teachers on how to wreck your own empire ;)
(Score: 2) by opinionated_science on Wednesday July 05 2017, @11:28PM (1 child)
So he has a new job?
(Score: 2) by takyon on Wednesday July 05 2017, @11:56PM
Space Marines will wipe Bug Willis off their kinetic weapon.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2, Interesting) by jasnw on Wednesday July 05 2017, @11:53PM (1 child)
This idea has been tried more than once in the past several decades. It always fails because the other military services hate the idea of another service coming along. The Navy and Air Force both already believe that space operations "belong" to them, and the Army hates the idea of there being yet another military mouth to feed. Every time it has been tried in the past, the outcome is that in 10-15 years there is still no Space Force, just the same players with perhaps different organizational names. Trying again would just be another huge waste of money.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday July 06 2017, @01:26AM
Apparently you forgot where the Airforce came from. The Army is still seething.
The Airforce is largely incompetent these days. Trying for years to get rid of the very planes the Army and Marines want more of. The Airforce prefers to be console jockies sitting in California flying a drone to ambush some pickup truck in the desert and let the navy fly most of the high risk missions.
There's enough infighting there to keep both of them tied up for decades.
The only service that has any competence in managing large platform remote (and) mobile installations is the Navy.
The only service that has any competence flying remote operated vehicles is the AirForce and NASA.
Surely it wouldn't be hard to find people in both services just itching to jump a couple ranks into a new service, and Contractors champing at the bit to find a new customer.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.