0
   

A Bush Policy I Agree With, Totally

 
 
Reply Mon 9 Oct, 2006 09:56 am
http://www.space.com/news/061007_bush_spacepolicy.html

Quote:
New Bush Space Policy Unveiled, Stresses U.S. Freedom of Action
By Leonard David
Senior Space Writer
posted: 07 October 2006
02:45 pm ET

U.S. President George W. Bush has authorized a sweeping new national space policy, green-lighting an overarching national policy that governs the conduct of America's space activities.

The new policy supports not only a Moon, Mars and beyond exploration agenda, but also responds to a post 9/11 world of terrorist actions, such as the need for intelligence-gathering internal and external to the United States.

U.S. assets must be unhindered in carrying out their space duties, the Bush space policy says, stressing that "freedom of action in space is as important to the United States as air power and sea power."

Without fanfare, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) rolled out the National Space Policy on October 6?-a document that supersedes a September 1996 version of the directive. President Bush signed off on the new space policy on August 31.

A 10-page unclassified version of the U.S. National Space Policy was posted Friday on the OSTP web site.

Across the solar system

The White House document spells out U.S. space policy goals, including the implementation of a sustained "innovative human and robotic exploration program" geared to extending human presence across the solar system.

As a civil space guideline, the policy calls upon NASA to "execute a sustained and affordable human and robotic program of space exploration and develop, acquire, and use civil space systems to advance fundamental scientific knowledge of our Earth system, solar system, and universe."

The Bush space policy supports use of space nuclear power systems to "enable or significantly enhance space exploration or operational capabilities." The document adds that utilization of nuclear power systems "shall be consistent with U.S. national and homeland security, and foreign policy interests, and take into account the potential risks."

The policy highlights an interagency approval process for space launch and in-space use of nuclear power sources.

Risk from orbital debris

Among a wide range of topics - including commercial space policy and international cooperation?-the Bush space policy includes an orbital debris section. It labels human-made space junk as posing a risk to continued reliable use of space-based services and operations, including the safety of space travelers and property in space and on Earth.

"The United States shall seek to minimize the creation of orbital debris by government and non-government operations in space in order to preserve the space environment for future generations," the space policy explains.

In regards to curbing space debris, the document encourages foreign nations and international organizations to also take steps toward debris minimization.

Freedom of action

For 50 years, the U.S. has led the world in space exploration, developing "a solid civil, commercial, and national security space foundation," the document notes.

"Space has become a place that is increasingly used by a host of nations, consortia, businesses, and entrepreneurs," the space policy states. "In this new century, those who effectively utilize space will enjoy added prosperity and security and will hold a substantial advantage over those who do not."

Additionally, the Bush space policy is designed to "ensure that space capabilities are available in time to further U.S. national security, homeland security, and foreign policy objectives." Moreover, a fundamental goal of the policy is to "enable unhindered U.S. operations in and through space to defend our interests there."

The policy calls upon the Secretary of Defense to "develop capabilities, plans, and options to ensure freedom of action in space, and, if directed, deny such freedom of action to adversaries."

Overhead intelligence

In a section called "Space-related Security Classification," the new space policy lists several unclassified facts, such as: The U.S. government conducts satellite photoreconnaissance that includes a near real-time capability, as well as overhead signals intelligence collection.

Among a number of tasks, U.S. government photoreconnaissance is used to "image the United States and its territories and possessions, consistent with applicable laws, for purposes including, but not limited to, homeland security."

The Director of National Intelligence is charged by the policy to "provide a robust foreign space intelligence collection and analysis capability that provides timely information and data to support national and homeland security."

For the complete White House National Space Policy Document, go to:

http://www.ostp.gov/html/US%20National%20Space%20Policy.pdf


Many times, it is claimed by those on the right that the 'Bush-haters' wouldn't give him any credit for good decisions even if they saw them, out of some sort of irrational decision to hate everything flowing from the man.

I have argued that this is not true, and this is a great example: I agree with the policies and goals put out by the Bush admin re: US space policy. For years I have argued that the need to colonize and conquer our near space (and farther) trumps pretty much every other strategic concern that we have as a people. The rewards for doing so are literally incalculable, and it is well understood from a military standpoint that he who controls the sky, controls the ground.

I commend the Bush admin and team for putting together a sensible space policy. Though I would, of course, like to see 10 times the funding, at least the words on paper look good.

I encourage all of you to read the PDF if possible and begin thinking about the future of Human colonization and expansion. With this week's news about NK nukes, it is time to start getting on top of the new frontier in war as well, and that's space. I am a pacifist, but I would like to see America acquire at least defensive Kinetic weapons before other nations do, for safety reasons if nothing else.

Cheers

Cycloptichorn
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 571 • Replies: 10
No top replies

 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Oct, 2006 11:20 am
You say that now, but just wait until the first detention center opens on Mars....

Wink
0 Replies
 
blacksmithn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Oct, 2006 11:29 am
Or until we decide to preemptively invade Venus...
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Oct, 2006 11:40 am
I like that money is going to science, so I'll live with the rest of it -- but I think a focus on manned spaceflight is a waste of money. Just not enough benefits for the cost involved, although I recognize that the glamour of it all helps attract people to scientific fields...

Colonization is something else, I guess, decidedly mixed feelings there but would want to research more.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Oct, 2006 11:54 am
sozobe wrote:
I like that money is going to science, so I'll live with the rest of it -- but I think a focus on manned spaceflight is a waste of money. Just not enough benefits for the cost involved, although I recognize that the glamour of it all helps attract people to scientific fields...

Colonization is something else, I guess, decidedly mixed feelings there but would want to research more.


Sorry, but I think that you are incorrect when it comes to the manned spaceflight not being worth the cost. It is most definately 'worth the cost,' as ambitious space programs require on-the-spot decisions that robots and computers simply can't be trusted to make.

If we are serious about visiting the Moon, Mars, or more importantly, the Asteroid belt, anytime soon, it will be through manned missions. The qualities and abilities of an astronaut vs. a robot are simply impossible to compare; a well-trained astronaut is infinitely more adaptable and usable in space then the limited robots we currently can build.

I'm not sure why you would be against colonization, as it is currently the greatest imperative that our species has. It literally dwarfs any other concern, all other concerns combined, greatly. Colonization of space represents the only chance of survival for our species in the long run, and depending on your point of view, the short run as well.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Oct, 2006 12:07 pm
One reason for putting men into space, is to get good at it so that in the future we can put a lot of men into space, and colonize the moon, Mars, perhaps a few other bodies in our solar system, and eventually the nearer stars. At least this is true if one believes that Man should not remain confined to the Earth forever.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Oct, 2006 12:10 pm
You are 100% correct, Brandon.

In the short-term, I believe that there are a large number of military advantages to controlling space, and very few downsides. I think that those who claim that some are stuck in an 'old war' mentality, and that we need to adjust to the 'new war' against Al Qaeda, are fighting the 'old war' themselves.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Oct, 2006 12:20 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
You are 100% correct, Brandon.

In the short-term, I believe that there are a large number of military advantages to controlling space, and very few downsides. I think that those who claim that some are stuck in an 'old war' mentality, and that we need to adjust to the 'new war' against Al Qaeda, are fighting the 'old war' themselves.

Cycloptichorn


That's the one and only thing about the proposal that bothers me -- we're already turning hostile and looking at the 'military advantages.'
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Oct, 2006 12:21 pm
I agree to an extent, but what are we to do? Kinetic energy weapons (basically a rock you drop on something from space) have the potential to make ordinary warfare as obsolete as the rifle made the bow and arrow.

What options do we have as a people; to get on top of this, or to sit around and wait for someone else to get on top of it?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Oct, 2006 12:33 pm
Oh, I know that from a strictly pragmatic point of view you're right, Cyclo. It just bothers me that the human mind still works this way, even after millenia of evolutionary growth. We still look at a piece of real estate and think, "If I grab this, how will I defend it?" instead of thinking, "Ain't this purty? I'd sure like to share it with some other people."

BTW, Robert Heinlein, in his The Moon is a Harsh Mistress posits exactly what you're talking about re: kinetic energy weapons. In the book there's an insurrection by colonists on the Moon against an oppressive world government on Earth. What do the Moonies do? Why, they drop large rocks on Earth, of course! Smile
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Oct, 2006 01:07 pm
They've been looking at the military implications of space since before Sputnik.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » A Bush Policy I Agree With, Totally
Copyright © 2026 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 03/12/2026 at 06:03:58