Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site petrus.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!karn From: karn@petrus.UUCP (Phil R. Karn) Newsgroups: net.space Subject: Re: ASAT test Message-ID: <619@petrus.UUCP> Date: Wed, 2-Oct-85 12:47:41 EDT Article-I.D.: petrus.619 Posted: Wed Oct 2 12:47:41 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 3-Oct-85 06:35:48 EDT References: <2258@ukma.UUCP> Organization: Bell Communications Research, Inc Lines: 41 > I am completely for the ASAT tests. Anything that can shoot down nuclear > missiles before they can kill millions of people is OK by me. Even if they > only stop 10%, that's more people that will live. You are making a common mistake, that of confusing anti-satellite weapons ("ASATs") with the Strategic Defense Initiative ("SDI" or "Star Wars"), a so-called "research program" to develop ways to shoot down nuclear missiles. While some elements of the technology are the same, the first task is far easier than the second. > I am surprised that so many people see the ASAT program as evil. We are > talking about a defensive weapon here. Why don't you anti-ASAT people > go campaign against machine guns. They have killed more people than an > ASAT ever will. Until now, military satellites have been one of the VERY few technological innovations that have contributed to (instead of undermining) stability. They are the "eyes and ears" of each country's military staff. By providing the means to see what the other side is up to, satellites decrease the chances of being taken completely by surprise. By relaying communications to their nuclear forces, they improve the credibility of the "deterrent". Threatening these satellites can only aggravate an already dangerous situation. How would you respond if an important "spy" satellite suddenly stopped transmitting? Assume a technical failure? Assume the worst, namely that an attack is imminent? Blinding somebody who has a shotgun aimed at you is not a wise move, nor is stocking up on acid in preparation for such a move. The other reason why the ASAT test is such a bad decision is because neither side currently has the ability to attack satellites much above a few thousand kilometers. Our most important early-warning and communications satellites are generally in geostationary orbits, and were safe as long as the Soviet moratorium held. Now that Reagan has broken the moratorium, I fully expect a free-for-all to ensue in which ASATs capable of destroying satellites even in GEO to be developed. The result could be a disaster. Again, I'd like to strongly recommend the article on Antisatellite Weapons in the June 1984 issue of Scientific American. These points and many others are discussed in excellent detail. Phil Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com