China Tests Anti-Satellite Laser Weapon

[bradclark1]

Nothing much we can do about it but I'm sure this will make a few countries nervous.

http://www.aviationweek.com/avnow/news/channel_awst_story.jsp?id=news/CHI01177.xml

http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/1359/chinese-test-asat

[Letum]

That's nothing new really.

There have been ways of shooting at satellites for a long time.

The real news story here is that China have filled earth's orbit with a new lot of dangerous space-junk that may knock out some other satellites.

But we can't blame China for space junk; the English, Americans and Russians have all shot down satellites at one time or another.

[bradclark1]

No, the real news is that China destroyed a satellite using a laser as the topic title says. Thats one up from their capability of attempting to blind satellites. That takes away an American advantage in event of an asian war.

[Kapitan]

I dont think american ground forces are going to be able to do much in china itself if a war ever came to it, the chinese populations is just too big even though the army is not well trained china can afford to loose a few million where as us lot can bearley afford a few hundred thousand.

Navy and airforce is a diffrent matter.

But the smaller weaker countries such as iran can still be a threat cause china could seacretly support them.

[CCIP]

I still don't think it's incredibly new. It's not a capability that the Chinese would not be able to develop - and then there's the fact that precisely for the reason of being at a disadvantage, they had the impetus to develop it quicker.

All in all, let's just hope that like all their other deterrents, it stays a deterrent.

[Kapitan]

Fact of the matter is a tomahawk can take out a satalite (apparently) but a laser is cheaper than throwing $2 million dollar missile at it.

And i realy wouldnt under estimate the chinese capibilites either.

[TteFAboB]

That's more than the blinding laser indeed. That one is fired from the surface of the planet. You can hide it under a big styrofoam rock or whatever. So it's a real advantage that can only be possibly countered if its location is discovered/known and prone to attack.

Relying solely on the information from these two links, I understand this thing as a "single-use" rocket-delivered mini-anti-satellite satellite. So if you can take the rocket down before it reaches orbit, say, with a laser-equipped 747, the thing won't be able to deploy and hit any satellite at all.

So you can certainly blind a satellite easily and for as long as you keep the emitting LASER source safe from aggression. But since this thing is launched by a rocket, there is a possibility of shooting it down. As far as I can tell from the two links it can only be used once, to kill a second satellite you have to launch another rocket, unless you can fit more than one unit in the same rocket or create a different model capable of hitting more than one satellite. Either way, this one kill per satellite means all you have to do is launch another observation satellite. You may loose one but that's no problem if you have a spare one. How much do these spy satellites cost anyway? Better leave this question unanswered. :rotfl:

I don't know how easy it would be to intercept a rocket before it can reach spy-satellite orbit, that's for the strategists to figure out. How well-protected the launching platform is, how close you'd need to get that 747 to be able to destroy a big rocket (or just melt the cargo if that kind of targetting is possible), for how long you can keep firing and shooting them down, etc.

Granted, if we're talking about war you might aswell keep Alert 5 on the launching pads and keep stuff ready to destroy them at the first sign of trouble. I guess the point would be to have a satellite destroyer up there already before any war starts, launched during times of peace, like this test. Then it's already too late and it would require a conventional rocket attack or another satellite destroyer to take it down, the anti-mini-anti-satellite satellite, which would probably arrive too late anyway, after the first satellite had already done its job. This seems by far the best option. Especially if you could disguise it as a fully-functional Weather satellite. :ping:

[tycho102]

Yeah, it was a "kinetic kill vehicle", which is just a fancy way of saying a guided rocket without warhead.

I'm not real happy with our ruling elite class, right now. With our education system being as poor as it is, there is less oversight through voting, allowing corporationism and fascism to hold too much power. I'm at the point where I'm ready to take some deadly risks, and as such, I currently welcome competition from China. America needs some serious reprioritization, and historically, it's only come through death (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludlow_Massacre) and destruction (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/2c/Ludlow_Death_Car.jpg/350px-Ludlow_Death_Car.jpg).





So, I'm actually kind of pleased with this development. China (read: the Communist Party of China) has been making some good decisions.

[ASWnut101]

a really easy and inexpensive way is to burst a nuke near the satillite's orbit. The EMP will take care of it.

[peterloo]

Anyone knows the physics of laser (I don't know much, sorry) knows that laser is capable to burn a hole in a satellite... American owns similiar techology, I think

Don't be that panic... PLA is not going to shoot down your Spy-satellite mod for Silent Hunter 3 :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

[bradclark1]

Here's a piece from The Day about it.
http://www.theday.com/re.aspx?re=51cf300b-e411-4608-aeff-85e7728be7c8

[Iceman]

Lasers..? This is old news....don't make me use mine.:D
http://www.thereminvox.com/ezimagecatalogue/catalogue/phpG0D9vC.jpg

[Kapitan_Phillips]

Already been done. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Duj2oZIC8U)

[Iceman]

Already been done. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Duj2oZIC8U)

LOL :up:

[3Jane]

As undestand it they used a ballistic missile rather than a laser. From what I have read though they are developing such a system. Anyway, the pot is calling the kettle black as far as western nations complaining about such weapons is concerned.

[Kapitan_Phillips]

Laser Update (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqos3j07jzc&NR)

[Sea Demon]

This is all very sobering news indeed. This is the Clinton/Democrat chickens coming home to roost. As foolish as the Clinton administration was, I don't think they meant for this supposed peaceful transfer of space related technologies to be used in an miltary related ASAT program. What a bunch of fools. And the people who vote for them..fools all. This is how the Democrat voter put their own families into danger. By voting for a party that is intent on allowing our technologies to get in the hands of our enemies. Make no mistake, these technologies used in accurate launch vehicles being flown in a precise manner to precise orbital planes are from the Democrats. Clinton's Commerce Department changed the rules on "dual use" technology in the 90's, making sure China got this technology. It took a Republican president to change it.

Sickening. Absolutely sickening. Another example of a Democrat selling out our national security/military technologies. And now we pay the price. Good job Clinton. :down:

[bradclark1]

And the people who vote for them..fools all.
If the Republican party didn't have so many perverts, criminals, a arrogant rubber stamping do nothing congress, and a lying president maybe the Republicans would be still in charge.

[Takeda Shingen]

Well, this is going to move in a very productive direction. Looks like this thread is going on the watch list.

[waste gate]

And the people who vote for them..fools all.
If the Republican party didn't have so many perverts, criminals, a arrogant rubber stamping do nothing congress, and a lying president maybe the Republicans would be still in charge.


People in glass houses should not throw stones.

[Sea Demon]

And the people who vote for them..fools all.
If the Republican party didn't have so many perverts, criminals, a arrogant rubber stamping do nothing congress, and a lying president maybe the Republicans would be still in charge.

That statement is made more out of frustration. It seems that everytime there is a Democrat President, they are willing to hand over some aspect of national security to hostile elements. Jimmy Carter gives away the most strategic waterway in our hemisphere (Panama Canal), with nothing to show for it. Nothing returned. And China is now operating both sides of that canal thanks to Bill Clinton not stopping the bid for both ports from that Chinese government owned "business". Bill Clinton allows hostile foreign entities into our national labratories. Clinton also changes rules built into the system that protect sensitive military technologies from being used by our enemies against us. All so he can "reach out" or get some money for the DNC. Heck Bill Clinton is the best honorary President China ever had.

Now this "dual use" space technology handed over by Bill Clinton's administration is being used against us militarily. And the frustration is, Democrat voters can't seem to see this inherent flaw in their party. That they vote for people who openly betray them and their families to hostile foreign interests. They want their free-bee health care, abortion on demand, gay marriage, federalized everything, unions galore, etc. etc., but fail to see that it won't mean a thing if these same people who promise them the world give away these elements of national security.

[bradclark1]

People in glass houses should not throw stones.
I said so many criminals. That means more. Am I wrong anywhere?

[bradclark1]

That statement is made more out of frustration. It seems that everytime there is a Democrat President, they are willing to hand over some aspect of national security to hostile elements. Jimmy Carter gives away the most strategic waterway in our hemisphere (Panama Canal), with nothing to show for it. Nothing returned. And China is now operating both sides of that canal thanks to Bill Clinton not stopping the bid for both ports from that Chinese government owned "business". Bill Clinton allows hostile foreign entities into our national labratories. Clinton also changes rules built into the system that protect sensitive military technologies from being used by our enemies against us. All so he can "reach out" or get some money for the DNC. Heck Bill Clinton is the best honorary President China ever had.

Now this "dual use" space technology handed over by Bill Clinton's administration is being used against us militarily. And the frustration is, Democrat voters can't seem to see this inherent flaw in their party. That they vote for people who openly betray them and their families to hostile foreign interests. They want their free-bee health care, abortion on demand, gay marriage, federalized everything, unions galore, etc. etc., but fail to see that it won't mean a thing if these same people who promise them the world give away these elements of national security.

The real intent behind this was a good idea but it got subverted.
From reading up on this dual use thing the intentions wasn't to give way the farm. What it was was these corporations saw a way to make big bucks and sold this technology to the Chinese and Russians. The corporations were caught after the fact but I'm not sure if they were punished or not which doesn't really mean squat seeing as how after the fact is too late. Like I said before Clinton should have gone to jail for this. In fact I think he still should be charged with treason. But to blame a political party is ludicrous. All I have to say is why didn't the Republican controlled Senate block it?

free-bee health care = Every American should have health care as there right. America pays the most for the least care of all modern nations. Why?
Politics!

abortion on demand = I think the term you mean is Pro Choice. Who are you to put your choice on anyone else? It's none or your business and it's none of mine. It's that womens body. Will the next step be to outlaw masturbation because sperm isn't being used to impregnate and all those little soldiers die?

gay marriage = Exactly how does two gays that love each other hurt you or I? A gay is not gay by choice. What right do you or I have to penalize their lives because of what they are?

unions galore = You hold Democrats responsible for unions?

Sounds like you want to force your morals on a lot of people. Not exactly my America buddy. :down: :)


PS Panama Canal is not in the United States and the cold war is over.

[Sea Demon]

The real intent behind this was a good idea but it got subverted.
From reading up on this dual use thing the intentions wasn't to give way the farm. What it was was these corporations saw a way to make big bucks and sold this technology to the Chinese and Russians. The corporations were caught after the fact but I'm not sure if they were punished or not which doesn't really mean squat seeing as how after the fact is too late. Like I said before Clinton should have gone to jail for this. In fact I think he still should be charged with treason. But to blame a political party is ludicrous. All I have to say is why didn't the Republican controlled Senate block it?

free-bee health care = Every American should have health care as there right. America pays the most for the least care of all modern nations. Why?
Politics!

abortion on demand = I think the term you mean is Pro Choice. Who are you to put your choice on anyone else? It's none or your business and it's none of mine. It's that womens body. Will the next step be to outlaw masturbation because sperm isn't being used to impregnate and all those little soldiers are dying?

gay marriage = Exactly how does two gays that love each other hurt you or I? A gay is not gay by choice. What right do you or I have to penalize their lives because of what they are?

unions galore = You hold Democrats responsible for unions?

Sounds like you want to force your morals on a lot of people. Not exactly my America buddy. :down: :)


PS Panama Canal is not in the United States and the cold war is over.

Which is why I say fools. You hand somebody who says they want to kill you a gun, chances are they'll shoot you. Fools. It doesn't matter your intentions, learn from your mistakes. It's unfortunate the Democrats never seem to. They're dangerous as a party in power because they do things like this. The Republicans may not be great, but they won't do stupid suicidal stuff like this.

Health-care-- Heathcare is not a right. Yes it would be great if everyone is insured. And everyone should be insured. But it is not a constitutional guarantee. There needs to be reform so we can get everyone covered, but the reform needs to be done in the private sector. And it would also help if we had some tort reform as well. The government has never been able to deliver anything of value at a reasonable cost other than national defense. I don't know why Democrats think government can run their healthcare when they can't manage anything else.

abortion on demand---Yes. Abortion on demand. Not "Pro-Choice". A good choice would be to think about the results of your actions before making it. And living with the consequences. It's a wonder why the "choice" is never thought about before the action with lefties. :hmm:

gay marriage-- This is a topic I don't wish to get on just like abortion. But we as a society have a right to define our institutions. As of now, we don't want gay marriage to be legalized. We have voted on it in many states. That's how democracy works. Live with it. Some see it as a breakdown in societal norms. Get over it.

unions-- Have outlived their usefulness and purposes. And yes, Democrats are the beneficiaries of union organization. And the teacher's unions sure have done a bang up job with public education, don't ya' think?

Sounds like you are an anything goes, moral relativist. Not my America at all, pal. In my America, we lock up criminals, we defend the country, we teach right and wrong, and we promote responsibility and living with the choices of your actions.

PS. The Panama Canal is a very important strategic waterway built by the USA and owned by a U.S. trust until Carter gave it away with nothing in return. This important waterway could mean life or death in a struggle in the Pacific Ocean. But of course you make excuses for it because you probably want to soothe your soul so you can continue to vote for these Democrats who like to give hostile foreign elements our national security treasures. All so you can continue your moral relativism and voting yourself gifts from the public treasury.

[waste gate]

free-bee health care = Every American should have health care as there right. America pays the most for the least care of all modern nations. Why?
Politics!


Ask the American Medical Association. As doctors, these folks have a vested interest and perhaps their opinion about giving away their services are up for discussion. Doctors spend a great deal of personal resources both monetarily and educationaly to do their jobs. Are you willing to give up that quality of care because those who spent much money and time can no longer make a living? Are you willing to give up the best medical care on the planet for your loved ones for mediocre care?



abortion on demand = I think the term you mean is Pro Choice. Who are you to put your choice on anyone else? It's none or your business and it's none of mine. It's that womens body. Will the next step be to outlaw masturbation because sperm isn't being used to impregnate and all those little soldiers are dying?

What about the choice of the unborn who are murdered at the rate of 25,000 per week. How can anyone object to the deaths of any other subset of the population when they allow, no promote by using the term 'Pro Choice' this kind of genocide?

gay marriage = Exactly how does two gays that love each other hurt you or I? A gay is not gay by choice. What right do you or I have to penalize their lives because of what they are?


Can say that homosexual unions promote procreation, contribute to society by promoting healthy social relationships (you critisized Rep Mark Foley for being gay
even after it became clear that the intern was of legal age and perhaps gay himself).


unions galore = You hold Democrats responsible for unions?

I don't know what this is about so I will leave it alone.

Sounds like you want to force your morals on a lot of people. Not exactly my America buddy. :down: :)

This sounds like the same question, but the shoe is on the other foot.

Thank you for your patiences and consideration

[tycho102]

Sickening. Absolutely sickening. Another example of a Democrat selling out our national security/military technologies. And now we pay the price. Good job Clinton. :down:
While I think he did arrange some transfers, this was a orbital satellite. Using ground-based radar, you can develop a highly accurate orbital profile. Not be belittle the Chinese achievement, but it's much different from a 30-minute ICBM profile (boost, coast and guide by star-check, entry). They did this without Clintonian aid.

The pressure is on Taiwan, because the Chinese don't want any other break-away states. That's why China is making all these military ventures. Their northwest is something like 50% muslim, and they have a high concentration of Koreans in the south. Not to even consider the rural tribal farmers in their central-west, whom they are just now attempting to....no other way to say it....civilize. Literacy, telecommunications, roads. For the love of God, dentistry. Oh my God, dentistry. China needs denists. They need to burn down all the martial arts schools, and construct dentistry schools.

Stop shooting down satellites, start mandating village dentists. I'd go with that assessment.

[Sea Demon]

While I think he did arrange some transfers, this was a orbital satellite. Using ground-based radar, you can develop a highly accurate orbital profile. Not be belittle the Chinese achievement, but it's much different from a 30-minute ICBM profile (boost, coast and guide by star-check, entry). They did this without Clintonian aid.


Nope. As much as you'd like to believe that, Clinton's Commerce Dept. gave them the capabilities you saw demonstrated. Just because they called it commercial use technology then, doesn't mean it can't be used in military applications. All the Clinton Administration did was redefine the terms. Remember, this administration didn't know how to define the meaning of the word "is". I am an engineer in this field. The principles applied to guidance systems in ICBM's apply to vehicles lifting commercial payloads. You're totally and dangerously wrong. And I'm afraid there's too many Democrats that are deluded in the same way. They'll make excuses, defend Clinton's actions, all so they can soothe their own conscience, so they can continue to vote for these dangerous wretches who sell their families security down the river. And for what???? "Free" healthcare?? Gay marriage?? "Free" abortion on demand?? Is that all worth your national security?

[bradclark1]

Which is why I say fools. You hand somebody who says they want to kill you a gun, chances are they'll shoot you. Fools. It doesn't matter your intentions, learn from your mistakes. It's unfortunate the Democrats never seem to. They're dangerous as a party in power because they do things like this. The Republicans may not be great, but they won't do stupid suicidal stuff like this.
So you don't know why the Republican Senate didn't at least try to block it?
Health-care-- Heathcare is not a right. Yes it would be great if everyone is insured. And everyone should be insured. But it is not a constitutional guarantee. There needs to be reform so we can get everyone covered, but the reform needs to be done in the private sector. And it would also help if we had some tort reform as well. The government has never been able to deliver anything of value at a reasonable cost other than national defense. I don't know why Democrats think government can run their healthcare when they can't manage anything else.
This is the 21st century, not the 18th. It should be a right. The HMO's own the american health system and a lot of politicians. The private sector isn't going to give that up.
The government has never been able to deliver anything of value at a reasonable cost other than national defense. I don't know why Democrats think government can run their healthcare when they can't manage anything else.
If you can do it for one why not another?
Umm, the republicans lost the elections because they were useless and didn't do their job so come again.
Yes. Abortion on demand. Not "Pro-Choice". A good choice would be to think about the results of your actions before making it. And living with the consequences. It's a wonder why the "choice" is never thought about before the action with lefties.
So let me get this straight. You think you should only have sex to make babies. Go live in the vatican until you can deal with the real world then come back.
This is a topic I don't wish to get on just like abortion. But we as a society have a right to define our institutions. As of now, we don't want gay marriage to be legalized. We have voted on it in many states. That's how democracy works. Live with it. Some see it as a breakdown in societal norms. Get over it.
Who is we? I haven't heard of a national vote. I've seen Bush in action on the subject. How many states have voted?
unions-- Have outlived their usefulness and purposes. And yes, Democrats are the beneficiaries of union organization. And the teacher's unions sure have done a bang up job with public education, don't ya' think?
Tell me how they have outlived their usefulness and why Democrats are beneficiaries of unions then I can give you a logical reply. Me personnaly I think some unions are greedy so and so's(auto workers for one) and have dug their own graves, but a lot serve a purpose.
Education: That is squarely on the goverment. Teach to test, tax cuts, budget cuts, not enough teachers. How many states are complaining that the fed is not providing for No Child Left Behind. Many initial supporters of NCLB have since broken with the Bush Administration over what they claim is the White House's failure to adequately fund its own programs. Don't blame the teachers for the failure of parents to bring the hammer down on our elected officials. It's easy to blame it on teachers when parents aren't doing their jobs. My youngest gets her bachelors in Biology in May then on to her masters. Deans list each semester and yes I'm ultra proud.
Sounds like you are an anything goes, moral relativist. Not my America at all, pal. In my America, we lock up criminals, we defend the country, we teach right and wrong, and we promote responsibility and living with the choices of your actions.
Fraid not I'm value-pluralism and thats America. You sound like a morals deacon in the catholic church. As for the rest you make me laugh. I have three adult kids who don't do drugs, two don't drink, none smoke, did well in school, never in trouble in school and never had trouble with the police, never unemployed for even one day and pay their bills. I'd say they have moral and ethical values and know the difference between right and wrong. I'm an American adult. I don't need a goverment to tell me how to live. If I were a Democrat I'd sat I'm an average Democrat.
I defended my country for eighteen and a half years dragging my family around and living in one place or another no longer then two or three years. So I think I can say that each member of my family have paid the price for defending our country. Can you say the same? The vast majority of soldiers are Democrat. I guess the Republicans aren't as patriotic.
PS. The Panama Canal is a very important strategic waterway built by the USA and owned by a U.S. trust until Carter gave it away with nothing in return. This important waterway could mean life or death in a struggle in the Pacific Ocean. But of course you make excuses for it because you probably want to soothe your soul so you can continue to vote for these Democrats who like to give hostile foreign elements our national security treasures. All so you can continue your moral relativism and voting yourself gifts from the public treasury.
Your sore because we didn't get anything for the panama canal? Grow up. 27,500 workers are estimated to have died during construction of the canal. I'd say thats a more than fair price to pay. The only thing the Chinese do is operate. That's all we did. All we have to do is send a force to take and secure which we would have to do anyway in event of war so where is the defence issue? There isn't one.
No Democrat tried to cover the purchase of all American ports by a terrorist state like your Republicans and Republican president did. Democrats and the people stopped that stupidity. Which party consistently has the biggest bank roll in elections? The Republicans do. Where does that money come from? Corporations. So who benefits monetarily from bribes and err donations the most? Republicans do.

[Sea Demon]

Brad, I don't think you're aware of how these things happened. The Republican Senate didn't know what was going on until after the fact. Like I said, the Clinton Administration redefined what was commercial use/military use/dual use. They never had a chance. The Clinton administration was closed on this. The Pentagon protested once they caught wind of it. But it was too late in most circumstances. I know people in Loral right now that can tell you it was a fast and furious couple of years. And no press whatsoever. But that's OK, continue to soothe yourself.

And sorry, healthcare is not a constitutional right. If you want it to be, change the constitution through the process. What you are vying for is economic fascism through governmental healthcare control. I'm responsible for everyone else's healthcare? Why not their TV sets? Why not give everyone a right to own a government paid for car? You need one to get to work, right? Oh, I know we need reform. But government/socialist healthcare ain't the solution. And yeah, the Republicans lost. They deserved to. But the Democrats push for this type of nonsense (and much more) is the reason they'll be back. The Republicans lost because people lost faith in them, not because annybody gained faith in the Democrats.

I refuse to get more into unions or abortion. For now. But I will say that choices in life have consequences. Democrats like to remove bad consequences using my dime. That's what I'm against in principle. In terms of education, I will say you're right with one thing. Government in education is the problem. Education is more of a local concern. That's the way it was intended.

pluralism is just another way of saying "I have no core values". Anything goes. And you're quite lucky St. Brad. You're kids turned out good. Most people who do not give their kids solid values and knowledge of "right and wrong" have problems.

And this is the biggy. You say:

I'm an American adult. I don't need a government to tell me how to live

Great. I agree. But why can't you apply that to economic freedom and life choices as well. You don't want a government to tell you how to live. But you want a government there to bail your behind out of every bad choice you and others make. All with my dime. Either you're free, or you're not brad.

And sorry, but if you can't see the Panama Canal situation for what it is, you're lost. You're wonderful Democrats gave away a very important strategic waterway, for nothing. We may need it again. And the very people we may need it against now control it through a state run company. All due to Bill Clinton's lack of focus on this area after we left.

P.S. Yes, I served my country as both enlisted and officer. For 12 years. I continue to be in the IRR today. I went to 3 stateside locations and was deployed to Europe for 3 years. I went on deployment to Turkey. So what's you're point?

[bradclark1]

And you're quite lucky St. Brad.
No, luck didn't come into it. I actually was gone for most of their upbringing until their mid teens so I have to give credit to my wife. She's quite a saint.:lol:
I'm off untill the morrow.

[AJ!]

The missile china launched didnt have a warhead. the sheer force of it hitting the satellite was enough.

I think the point of the matter is its not the fact china has the ability to destroy satellites, but the fact they actualy launched the missile in the first place.
Its like the US launching a nuke... we all know they can but to actualy go ahead and do it would be politicaly catastrophic

Also as stated already the US would suffer a huge blow if china was able to take out their satellites. Americas force relies far too much on their satellites for a dominance on the field

[bradclark1]

Ask the American Medical Association. As doctors, these folks have a vested interest and perhaps their opinion about giving away their services are up for discussion. Doctors spend a great deal of personal resources both monetarily and educationaly to do their jobs. Are you willing to give up that quality of care because those who spent much money and time can no longer make a living? Are you willing to give up the best medical care on the planet for your loved ones for mediocre care?

Doctors are owned by HMO's also. They go by the HMO's rules and prices or don't get patients. I'm not saying doctors should give away their services. They can still work for a national health-care system and be well paid. People should have the option to choose and pay for private care if they wish however private care people can't turn around and use public health just to get out of paying that tax. Doctors should have the option of taking private or public health. Now that is just a generality.
We don't have the best health care in the world. We have the worst health care for the dollar then any modern nation. In Canada an average of $630 dollars is spent annually by individuals or private insurance companies for health care, including dental, eye care, and drugs. In the United States this number is $2719.
What about the choice of the unborn who are murdered at the rate of 25,000 per week. How can anyone object to the deaths of any other subset of the population when they allow, no promote by using the term 'Pro Choice' this kind of genocide?
This depends on your definition of what is a living being. This could be a topic of it's own. I myself am against abortion but I believe that a person should have choice.
Can say that homosexual unions promote procreation, contribute to society by promoting healthy social relationships (you criticized Rep Mark Foley for being gay
even after it became clear that the intern was of legal age and perhaps gay himself).

A marriage is a union of two people. It doesn't say squat about creation and yes a gay couple can promote healthy social relationships. What makes you think they can't? I didn't criticize Foley for being gay. I criticized him for being a pedophile. Two sets of parents would not allow their children to be questioned in regards to Foley. I don't think parents would talk for legal adults. I also don't think a legal consenting gay adult would complain about sexual overtures unless they were unwanted. On top of that Foley was using his position for sexual purposes.
This sounds like the same question, but the shoe is on the other foot.
Not really, because I know people have different morals and as long as it's not criminal or degenerate I feel that people should be able to exercise their own.

[bradclark1]

I'm going to do some investigating on the dual technology thing then respond. I do however remember it in the news so your 'no press' comment doesn't walk.
And sorry, healthcare is not a constitutional right. If you want it to be, change the constitution through the process. What you are vying for is economic fascism through governmental healthcare control. I'm responsible for everyone else's healthcare? Why not their TV sets? Why not give everyone a right to own a government paid for car? You need one to get to work, right? Oh, I know we need reform. But government/socialist healthcare ain't the solution.
Read my response to Waste Gate. But I'll just tack this bit up.
We have the worst health care for the dollar then any modern nation. In Canada an average of $630 dollars is spent annually by individuals or private insurance companies for health care, including dental, eye care, and drugs. In the United States this number is $2719. If it takes economic fascism through governmental healthcare control to fix it, so be it.
The Republicans lost because people lost faith in them, not because annybody gained faith in the Democrats.
I somewhat agree with that but thats all it took. Like I said if the Republicans get back in power they know to do there jobs, listen to the people and not be a presidents rubber stamp that would be okay by me.

pluralism is just another way of saying "I have no core values". Anything goes.
Value-pluralism is the idea that there are several values which may be equally correct and fundamental. That means to be adult enough to know there is more then one answer. Something you seem incapeable of grasping.
Most people who do not give their kids solid values and knowledge of "right and wrong" have problems.
Right. You seem to be under the assumption that only Republicans and all Republicans are capeable of that. That's would be funny if it wasn't so patheticly sad.
Great. I agree. But why can't you apply that to economic freedom and life choices as well. You don't want a government to tell you how to live. But you want a government there to bail your behind out of every bad choice you and others make. All with my dime. Either you're free, or you're not brad.
Why is it that you think if you aren't a Republican everyone else is is a low life, low income, lower class scum, with no morals that just have their hands out to take your dime?
And sorry, but if you can't see the Panama Canal situation for what it is, you're lost. You're wonderful Democrats gave away a very important strategic waterway, for nothing. We may need it again. And the very people we may need it against now control it through a state run company. All due to Bill Clinton's lack of focus on this area after we left.
You need to reread my reponse and understand what I said then come back to reality.
P.S. Yes, I served my country as both enlisted and officer. For 12 years. I continue to be in the IRR today. I went to 3 stateside locations and was deployed to Europe for 3 years. I went on deployment to Turkey. So what's you're point?
Sounds like you are an anything goes, moral relativist. Not my America at all, pal. In my America, we lock up criminals, we defend the country, we teach right and wrong, and we promote responsibility and living with the choices of your actions.
I proved how wrong you are. As far as the IRR you don't have a choice.

[AJ!]

Gone allittle off topic me thinks :-?

[bradclark1]

Gone allittle off topic me thinks :-?
Yeah, but it's my thread. :)

[moose1am]

The title of this thread is misleading. China used KENETIC ENERGY ballistic missile to destroy one of their aging satellites. NO LASER was used to destroy the satellite.

Now in the second link they spoke about the Chinese using a laser to track a US Satellite.

That's how I read the articles in the two links presented by the author of this thread.



No, the real news is that China destroyed a satellite using a laser as the topic title says. That's one up from their capability of attempting to blind satellites. That takes away an American advantage in event of an Asian war.

[bradclark1]

The title of this thread is misleading. China used KENETIC ENERGY ballistic missile to destroy one of their aging satellites. NO LASER was used to destroy the satellite.

Now in the second link they spoke about the Chinese using a laser to track a US Satellite.

That's how I read the articles in the two links presented by the author of this thread.

Thanks AJ and moose1am, you're right.:up: I have no idea where I came up with a laser.:hmm: I wasn't even reading any Buck Rogers at the time. Thanks for the heads up on the correction.
Doesn't lessen the results though.