Space Force has an operational weapon, and there’s no going back

Originally published at:


Can someone in the Biden admin pls change the logo so it isn’t a Starfleet Insignia anymore? This shit is why the Vulcans won’t talk to us.


It’s another own the libs thing. The right wing couldn’t ignore the Fully Automated Luxury Space Communism message in Star Trek anymore so they do this as a fuck you to us.

I don’t know if Biden will do anything about it, it’s not like he is supportive of the FALSC vision either. I expect he’ll just try and reinvent Space Force into a “friendlier” military force, and what better way than to willfully misunderstand what Starfleet is supposed to stand for.



surely that’s “intragalactic”, unless there’s something we don’t know about…


If someone destroys or interferes with our GPS or other satellite services, we are in great danger. What do you propose to do to limit this vulnerability? What part of our current military is responsible for defending our space-based infrastructure?


WW3 is going to suck.


Yeah, that stood out to me. Seems to be a lot of confusion about intergalactic… intergalactic, planetary, planetary, intergalactic… Another dimension, another dimension…

sorry, had a Beastie Boys moment there.


Guess I’m just not seeing it, but “military branch possesses weapon” doesn’t seem like a big deal to me, especially when we’re talking about a non-destructive communications jammer.

This is a big leap on Atherton’s part, based on unwarranted assumptions about this branch’s mission and fundamental misunderstandings of space security policy. His article is simple fear mongering, whatever you think of Space Force. (My take - it’ll probably end up being a bad idea, but it’s not OBVIOUSLY a bad idea, and not for the reasons most people think. This is not to give Trump any credit - despite public perception, the Space Force wasn’t his invention - the formation of a separate branch for space has been debated since before his administration.)


The assumption here is that the US is making the first move, however there’s no way to know because the US and other powers have been at it since the Cold War with various kinds of spy satellites. But looking at more recent history an argument can be made that Russia likely made the first known move

But there’s all kinds of shenanigans going on up there:


" The Salyut 3, although called a “civilian” station, was equipped with a “self-defence” gun which had been designed for use aboard the station, and whose design is attributed to Alexander Nudelman.[1] Some accounts claim the station was equipped with a Nudelman-Rikhter “Vulkan” gun, which was a variant of the 23 mm Nudelman aircraft cannon, or possibly a Nudelman NR-30 30 mm gun.[12] Later Russian sources indicate that the gun was the virtually unknown (in the West) Rikhter R-23.[13] These claims have reportedly been verified by Pavel Popovich, who had visited the station in orbit, as commander of Soyuz 14.[12] Due to potential shaking of the station, in-orbit tests of the weapon with cosmonauts in the station were ruled out.[1] The gun was fixed to the station in such a way that the only way to aim would have been to change the orientation of the entire station.[1][12] Following the last manned mission to the station, the gun was commanded by the ground to be fired; some sources say it was fired to depletion,[12] while other sources say three test firings took place during the Salyut 3 mission."


Yeah, space has been a militarized domain since Sputnik. Even Apollo, despite its show of “we come in peace,” ultimately had war on its mind. You don’t have to dig down far to find it.

ETA: And in any case, I’ve never understood all the pearl-clutching about space being a militarized domain. The land, sea, and air domains have been militarized for as long as human beings have existed within them - why should space be any different?


Important to remember that the Posse Comitatus Act, even though it sounds like a benevolent civil-liberties sort of thing, was actually created to end Reconstruction in the South after the Civil War, by denying the legitimate government of the US the power needed to protect the rights of freed slaves.

Having had three bad ideas doesn’t mean we should embrace a fourth. They amputated both my feet and my left hand. I guess I should let them remove my right hand as well so it’s a matched set.


That is basically another M.A.D. scenario. If satellites are actually taken out you can be sure our enemies satellites will be taken out. The world will have to live without GPS and telecommunications for potentially many years and it would cause such massive disruption no country/ countries would want to be held responsible for such chaos. It would possibly even provoke real war or even nuclear retaliation.

Does it mean it won’t happen? No, but even Russia and the Chinese understand (as they prepare ridiculous plans to the disable and destroy) that it would bring the world (themselves included) to their knees. Economies would be a disaster, food and goods would never reach people. Travel would basically be dead. A proper shit show of unprecedented scale and reach.

It gets especially dangerous if “rapid disassembly” is involved. So that’s no way of doing things in space combat since you’d be certain to lose all of your assets and prevent any space flights to go correct said problems as well. No repair or replacement flights could take place because of the dangers of debris.

Jamming a satellite could be just as dangerous. If it’s flight path can’t be controlled or adjusted because the signal is jammed it too could easily become a projectile/ orbital WMD if it collided with more sats.

Governments know this and that is why until cheetolay45 came along no one ever took “militarizing space” seriously. Despite what years of sci-fi have ingrained into our heads zero g warfare just isn’t practical. Literally the physics don’t work because any move will pretty much guarantee everyone on both sides dies.

I have a feeling space force will inevitably be dissolved or folded back into the air force. Maybe not by Biden but certainly in 20 years when Congress is sick and ducking tired of voting to give them money with no results, plans or immediately obvious need. Which has been the traditional argument against a separate branch. It’ll just die a slow death.


It’s not “embracing” it to recognize that it’s the nature of the beast. Where humans go, conflict goes, as well as the potential for violence, and it’s wise to prepare for that possibility. It would be nice if this wasn’t true, but it’s utopian nonsense to insist otherwise.


Literally EVERYONE with skin in the game took militarizing space seriously prior to 45. This comment is baffling.


It was so much more simple in the 50s~Space Cadet


In a space environment you simply can’t wage war the same way. It becomes far to dangerous for many, many reasons and basically everyone dies, on both sides. So why go through all of the futility of starting something that can’t be finished when the only end it mutually assured destruction? We did that already. Now we have enough weapons to destroy the entire plant 100x over. What was/ is the point in that?