2018.06.19 Space Force
Trump split the Air Force Space efforts into a separate agency, and the Press/left attacked it because it made sense.
~ Aristotle Sabouni
Created: 2018-08-16 |
In response to China's increased militarization of space, and Russia creating a Space Force, Donald Trump announced that he wanted to split the Air Force Space efforts into a separate agency. The Democrats and their media attacked the idea, because Orange Man Bad! ABC news spun it as racist because he used the phrase it would be a "separate but equal" agency to the Air Force (so they talked about civil rights and Plessy v. Ferguson). MSNBC and other outlets just mocked the idea and omitted context and balance in the discussion. The real news was suppressed: whether this was a good response to our frenemies actions or not.
More[edit | edit source]
While Democrats and their media will mock anything that the other side comes up with, before even thinking about it, I always ask myself, what are the parts of the truth you're not hearing? How about the following:
- This has been hotly debated in military circles for decades. Like the creation of the Air Force, if it becomes a strategic interest, you can't leave it to the other branches because they have their own focus and priorities, and their attention/procurement dollars will always go to those first.
- The 2010 National Security Strategy report urged more focus on space to make our forces more resilient and deter attacks. In 2011 the Obama administration released their strategy outlining steps to be taken. Then in 2017 a new NSS Report came out detailing again the urgency. Since then absolutely nothing has been done by the Air Force to implement any of Obama or the NSS report's suggestions. And when confronted the Air Force blames budgets, but it shows a lack of prioritization.[1]
- in 2015 Russia re-instituted their own Space Force (they'd originally created one in 1992). Or that in 2018 the Russians started testing killer Satellites in space: Satellites that have offensive capabilities to do space based ASAT / anti-satellite warfare. [2]
- In 2007 China created and deployed a Satellite that shot down one of it's own Satellites, and after 2010, 12 of every 15 space launches were military in nature (they're on track to triple their miliary space spending and exceed the U.S. in space R&D). China has never signed an agreement not to put or use Nuclear Weapons in space, and they had made a huge leap forward in the past decade by hacking and stealing American secrets. And in 2017 multiple articles had come out detailing China's new aggression and space capabilities and aspirations. [3]
- Currently, China, Russia, UK, France and the U.S. all have Space Commands -- just most operate as parts of other branches.
- The U.S. has the most military Satellite's currently (159, that we know of). Not all are controlled by the Air Force's SPACECOM (created in 1960), but spinning this off and giving them their own budget and letting them prioritize their own threats is what Space Force would be about. (This is no more a weaponization of space than anything that's gone on before, it doesn't change any prior treaties, it's just a consolidation of dispersed activities among all the other branches).
- The Democrats were pushing for the same thing as part of bipartisan efforts since Obama brought it up in 2010, but once Trump brought it up in June 2018, they all flipped and now proclaim it the dumbest idea ever, or claim that it violates treaties (which it does not).
Oh, you haven't heard about that? And that's proof enough why the Democrat media is a joke and a threat to the American public. The Democrats will run OpEds and Meme's galore to mock the whole idea that they were supporting just months before[4]. And their rubes (base) will go along blithely.
Despite all that information, Democrats oppose the idea of defending space 69/12, and Republicans are the inverse 68/14 in support. Why? Because to Democrats, the facts don't matter, cheap political maneuvers do, even if they put American interests at risk. It's either that, or ignorance about what's actually going on around them. How do we know that? Because the Democrats opposition to more space defense was much lower under Obama, and in fact, they were part of a bipartisan effort to implement the same thing. That bipartisanism evaporated after Trump championed it. [5] So like all issues, Democrats will put party interests above national interests, as Demonstrated by them reversing course on a dime, if the other side supports it. And most of the rubes that make up their base, don't follow enough details, or care enough, to recognize that they just reversed course. They just repeat what they've been told to think.
🔗 More
| |
| |
| |
| |
🔗 Links
- https://defenceindepth.co/2017/06/24/space-warfare-in-the-pentagon-in-support-of-an-independent-space-corps/
- https://theconversation.com/donald-trumps-space-force-isnt-as-new-or-as-dangerous-as-it-seems-101401
- https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/06/19/trumps-space-force-faces-hurdles-in-the-pentagon-and-congress/
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_force
FakeNews
- https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/scott-whitlock/2018/08/10/oh-my-goodness-msnbc-finds-plenty-mock-about-space-force
- https://www.abc15.com/news/trump-says-pentagon-directed-to-launch-space-force-branch-of-military
Tags: FakeNews Trump ABC MSNBC
- ↑ NSS report: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2018/04/13/as-concerns-over-war-in-space-rise-a-pair-of-reports-highlight-the-mounting-threat-russia-and-china-pose/
- ↑ Russia:
- ↑ China:
- https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/08/10/space-force-is-trumps-answer-to-new-russian-and-chinese-weapons/
- https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/12/why-we-should-be-worried-about-a-war-in-space/548507/
- http://spaceq.ca/chinas-surging-military-space-program-space-quarterly-archives/
- https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/apr/9/why-chinas-race-for-global-space-domination-must-b/
- https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-space-force-china-beijing-2018-8
- ↑ Mocking a serious issue:
- ↑ Democrats bipartisanism:
