NationStates

The Two Jerseys wrote:NASA/ESA astronauts currently outnumber the cosmonauts on the ISS five to two.

Guess who has first dibs on the lifeboat in that scenario...

Grenartia wrote:

Kubra wrote: er...you do?
A defining characteristic of Russia since Soviet times is working on cutting edge tech but with the Indian safety standards

God, no wonder the USSR collapsed (yes, yes, I know, vastly different cause there).

Russia should have their space privileges revoked until they can prove they're more responsible. To anyone who is angrily replying to this post, that was a joke.

Grenartia wrote:As I've already pointed out, if America did this, I'd be just as strong in my condemnation as I am now.

New haven america wrote:

Grenartia wrote:
God, no wonder the USSR collapsed (yes, yes, I know, vastly different cause there).

Russia should have their space privileges revoked until they can prove they're more responsible. To anyone who is angrily replying to this post, that was a joke.

I mean, not really no.

Accidents like Chernobyl were a massive sign of the Soviet institution failing, because they showed that almost no one in the government was actually equipped to govern.

Kaczynskisatva wrote:

Grenartia wrote:As I've already pointed out, if America did this, I'd be just as strong in my condemnation as I am now.

I guess, that's the dumb thing underlying the premise of this newest episode of Russia Bad.

Weapons testing is just one of those things that has to happen. Nations have a right to test their weapons, there's no practical way of discouraging it. It essentially maintains world peace that they do conduct weapons tests, because it provides competing nations with updated proofs of the cost of war. Nuking the Bikini Atoll, for example, was just one of those flexes that had to happen to keep anyone from getting any dumb ideas.

Could the Americans have nuked some other place, and kept some Pacific Islanders from getting radiation poisoning? Sure. Could the Russians have tested their weapons during some other orbital period of the ISS? Maybe. Does it matter that they did this test? Absolutely not.

You expect me to believe that we are seriously having this conversation, because it is a problem for someone that some monkeys we shot into space decided to "shelter in place" instead of doing... whatever it is they do up there, I guess, doing cartwheels and making inspirational/propaganda videos.

I am not going to believe this. It is an absurd thing. If they just hit the installation and blew it up, even that would not be much of a loss to the world. It would probably be a net benefit, just to watch the tears flow from people who thought that they were one step away from making Star Trek into real life. But that, at least, would be a kind of newsworthy event - as comedy.

What actually happened, here? Nothing.

So, I have two ways to interpret this story:

1) We are discussing this because, out of all the things which could possibly be worth talking about, the most important new fact is that a few people in a research facility took a precautionary measure equivalent to buckling their seatbelt on an airplane, because they thought maybe something would happen, but it didn't - and this is why this is on the discussion table for the day.

2) We are discussing this because, the US is butthurt that the Russians and Chinese are testing new weapons, even though it is generally understood that everyone gets to test weapons, because they need to run another "Russia Bad, Russia Threat" story, and this is the best idea they had, that day, to give a "newsflash" about what is a very stable, slowly developing situation. Additionally, they want to either pretend that they don't conduct the same tests, which they inevitably conduct if they can, or possibly, their R&D is so porked that they don't even have these same capacities to test them, and they are jealous that the Eurasian powers got them first.

One of these explanations is more realistic. Some people just can't sort information. If the Americans had just gone and blown the thing up, the first topic on my table would be their supply chain crisis.

Latorik wrote:The reason people are condemning russia is because other nations have shown a far greater level of safety when it comes to testing these weapons, like hitting them when they're already in decaying orbits and stuff. Presumably Russia also has this capability. They just... chose not too.

If any other nation did this I'd imagine the condemnation would be the same.

Petrolas wrote:To sum it up, its ok if america does it, but not if it doesnt do it. Not hypocritical at all, USA is known for an even hand in foreign policy.

Petrolas wrote:

Kubra wrote: China does, but the US doesn't (these days).
Again: if it's something the US won't even do, it's usually a clear sign not to do that.

To sum it up, its ok if america does it, but not if it doesnt do it. Not hypocritical at all, USA is known for an even hand in foreign policy.

Kaczynskisatva wrote:I would not condemn any country for conducting weapons tests, unless it actually caused damages to someone.

Kaczynskisatva wrote:

Latorik wrote:The reason people are condemning russia is because other nations have shown a far greater level of safety when it comes to testing these weapons, like hitting them when they're already in decaying orbits and stuff. Presumably Russia also has this capability. They just... chose not too.

If any other nation did this I'd imagine the condemnation would be the same.

Look, I mean, okay, maybe the Russians could have exercised more precautions here, but since nothing happened - maybe they exercised sufficient precautions? Maybe they said to themselves, "this could cause problems for the ISS" and then they said to themselves "no - it's fine" and then the ISS people were late coming to this conclusion and thought "maybe this could cause problems for us" but then, ultimately, it was fine.

Ultimately, it was fine.

So, what are we even talking about here?

I would not condemn any country for conducting weapons tests, unless it actually caused damages to someone. Since it didn't, in this case, I don't see the problem. It seems like an invented problem, for propaganda purposes. That would fit with the established pattern. We have so many real problems in the world, there is no logical reason to be thinking now about potential problems to small and non-essential things like the ISS if they didn't actually manifest.

Petrolas wrote:To sum it up, its ok if america does it, but not if it doesnt do it. Not hypocritical at all, USA is known for an even hand in foreign policy.

Really, it's fine with me if the Americans test their weapons all they want to. They can nuke the Bikini Atoll again if they want to, or whatever else they want to nuke, as long as it belongs to them. This would cause zero problems to my life. They can blow up something in space if they want to, as long as it doesn't actually interfere with other nation's space objects, like the Russian test didn't in this case. If they actually damage something, they should pay damages. But, they haven't, so far.

Space is an odd jurisdictional question for now, since no one can really claim it.

But, still - why are we even talking about this?

The only logical answer, is propaganda purposes. There is no real problem here. It is a non-issue. Everything turned out fine. If the Russians should be more diligent to make sure it remains a non-issue, I guess that Mr. Anthony Blinken can give them a phone call. It is good to make sure that non-issues remain as non-issues. But, why are we talking about them? Isn't there something more important happening?

If this is a pollution issue, we could be discussing the amount of pollution that India contributes to the world's ocean systems. That seems like a relevant pollution issue. Otherwise, it's just not clear what sort of issue this is supposed to be.

Petrolas wrote:

Kubra wrote: China does, but the US doesn't (these days).
Again: if it's something the US won't even do, it's usually a clear sign not to do that.

To sum it up, its ok if america does it, but not if it doesnt do it. Not hypocritical at all, USA is known for an even hand in foreign policy.

New haven america wrote:

Petrolas wrote:
To sum it up, its ok if america does it, but not if it doesnt do it. Not hypocritical at all, USA is known for an even hand in foreign policy.

Well America doesn't senselessly launch bombs into space to blow up satellites for show and threaten both domestic and international space activity now, does it?

Russia's Defense Ministry on Tuesday admitted that it destroyed a Russian satellite in a missile test but rejected claims that it had endangered the International Space Station or other spacecraft in the operation. "The Russian Defense Ministry successfully conducted a test, as a result of which the Russian spacecraft Tselina-D, which had been in orbit since 1982, was destroyed," the military said in a statement.

The ministry said, however, that debris from the test posed no risk to space activities, contradicting Washington's accusations. "The US knows for certain that the resulting fragments, in terms of test time and orbital parameters, did not and will not pose a threat to orbital stations, spacecraft and space activities," it said, adding that the US, China and India had conducted similar tests in the past. At a press conference in Moscow just before the statement was issued, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov went on the offensive against the US, saying the country is itself lax on space safety. "To declare that the Russian Federation creates risks for the peaceful use of space is, at the very least, hypocrisy," Lavrov said, adding that the US had ignored Russian and Chinese proposals to discuss a possible agreement on weapons in space...

The destruction of the satellite is only the fourth time a spacecraft has been hit from Earth. India is the most recent nation to have carried out such a test in 2019, with Delhi having faced criticism from the United States and other countries for creating masses of "space junk." The US and China shot down satellites in 2008 and 2007, respectively.

Shofercia wrote:

New haven america wrote:Well America doesn't senselessly launch bombs into space to blow up satellites for show and threaten both domestic and international space activity now, does it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Burnt_Frost

China, US, India, and now Russia have now launched big phallic objects into space to show that their ASAT tech works.

https://www.dw.com/en/russia-accuses-us ... a-59834986

Russia's Defense Ministry on Tuesday admitted that it destroyed a Russian satellite in a missile test but rejected claims that it had endangered the International Space Station or other spacecraft in the operation. "The Russian Defense Ministry successfully conducted a test, as a result of which the Russian spacecraft Tselina-D, which had been in orbit since 1982, was destroyed," the military said in a statement.

The ministry said, however, that debris from the test posed no risk to space activities, contradicting Washington's accusations. "The US knows for certain that the resulting fragments, in terms of test time and orbital parameters, did not and will not pose a threat to orbital stations, spacecraft and space activities," it said, adding that the US, China and India had conducted similar tests in the past. At a press conference in Moscow just before the statement was issued, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov went on the offensive against the US, saying the country is itself lax on space safety. "To declare that the Russian Federation creates risks for the peaceful use of space is, at the very least, hypocrisy," Lavrov said, adding that the US had ignored Russian and Chinese proposals to discuss a possible agreement on weapons in space...

The destruction of the satellite is only the fourth time a spacecraft has been hit from Earth. India is the most recent nation to have carried out such a test in 2019, with Delhi having faced criticism from the United States and other countries for creating masses of "space junk." The US and China shot down satellites in 2008 and 2007, respectively.

This was a weapons test. The ISS crew was never in any real danger, as a missile hitting a satellite must be extremely precise, and something tells me that numerous simulations were run, and the debris was deemed to be unable to irreparably harm the ISS. Did it interrupt a day's work? Absolutely. Was it a dick thing to do? Probably. Were the astronauts/cosmonauts in genuine danger? Nope. They had plenty of time to shelter, and they're not going to miss a satellite being destroyed. I'm guessing that Pakistan is up next.

New haven america wrote:

Shofercia wrote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Burnt_Frost

China, US, India, and now Russia have now launched big phallic objects into space to show that their ASAT tech works.

https://www.dw.com/en/russia-accuses-us ... a-59834986



This was a weapons test. The ISS crew was never in any real danger, as a missile hitting a satellite must be extremely precise, and something tells me that numerous simulations were run, and the debris was deemed to be unable to irreparably harm the ISS. Did it interrupt a day's work? Absolutely. Was it a dick thing to do? Probably. Were the astronauts/cosmonauts in genuine danger? Nope. They had plenty of time to shelter, and they're not going to miss a satellite being destroyed. I'm guessing that Pakistan is up next.

If you actually read your own bloody source you'd know that that happened because it wasn't going to burn in the atmosphere and would make landfall, endangering people's lives and destroying property which could cause a much larger international issue. Hence you've done absolutely fuck all to disprove my argument.

Oh, and the only countries that got pissy about were Russia and China, shocking.

You're getting lazy with your strange love and need to defend the kleptocratic oligarchic dictatorship that is Russia.

Shofercia wrote:

New haven america wrote:If you actually read your own bloody source you'd know that that happened because it wasn't going to burn in the atmosphere and would make landfall, endangering people's lives and destroying property which could cause a much larger international issue. Hence you've done absolutely fuck all to disprove my argument.

Oh, and the only countries that got pissy about were Russia and China, shocking.

You're getting lazy with your strange love and need to defend the kleptocratic oligarchic dictatorship that is Russia.

That's the official reason, much like WMDs were the official reason for invading Iraq. The satellite was launched in 2006, with ground control "losing" satellite control shortly after it reached orbit. The satellite posed minimal risk of falling, and I think it's the only incident, known to date, where a satellite is perfectly launched, and yet control is lost once it enters orbit, and never regained, while the satellite itself is in orbit, and posing minimal risk, has to get shot down within a 12-15 months, without any attempt made to retrieve it manually.

I should note that said satellite was launched after the Chinese attempted to shoot down their own satellite in February of 2006. US Satellite was launched in December of 2006, when it lost communication shortly after entering orbit. Then China successfully tested their ASAT in January of 2007. During the same year Russia began to sponsor a resolution to limit ASAT testing in the UN. An actual report further concluded that had the satellite been built with a different metal used for fuel tank, there'd be a nearly perfect chance of hydrazine burning up in atmosphere, and hence no need for an ASAT test. And the US knew this as a result of the 2003 Colombia disaster.

So while the talks for the new ASAT limited use treaty were ongoing, the US decided to use ASAT to shoot down that satellite, which just happened to have the fuel tanks that gave hydrazine a chance in hell to survive reentry... While I certainly can use words like "kleptocratic oligarchic dictatorship", although I think that describes the US Healthcare System quite well, I'll just point out that I didn't buy the WMD story, the whole "we're bringing democracy" bullshit, and the Brooklyn Bridge.

New haven america wrote:

Shofercia wrote:
That's the official reason, much like WMDs were the official reason for invading Iraq. The satellite was launched in 2006, with ground control "losing" satellite control shortly after it reached orbit. The satellite posed minimal risk of falling, and I think it's the only incident, known to date, where a satellite is perfectly launched, and yet control is lost once it enters orbit, and never regained, while the satellite itself is in orbit, and posing minimal risk, has to get shot down within a 12-15 months, without any attempt made to retrieve it manually.

I should note that said satellite was launched after the Chinese attempted to shoot down their own satellite in February of 2006. US Satellite was launched in December of 2006, when it lost communication shortly after entering orbit. Then China successfully tested their ASAT in January of 2007. During the same year Russia began to sponsor a resolution to limit ASAT testing in the UN. An actual report further concluded that had the satellite been built with a different metal used for fuel tank, there'd be a nearly perfect chance of hydrazine burning up in atmosphere, and hence no need for an ASAT test. And the US knew this as a result of the 2003 Colombia disaster.

So while the talks for the new ASAT limited use treaty were ongoing, the US decided to use ASAT to shoot down that satellite, which just happened to have the fuel tanks that gave hydrazine a chance in hell to survive reentry... While I certainly can use words like "kleptocratic oligarchic dictatorship", although I think that describes the US Healthcare System quite well, I'll just point out that I didn't buy the WMD story, the whole "we're bringing democracy" bullshit, and the Brooklyn Bridge.

*yawn*

Is that the best you got, trying to shift focus away from what actually happened?

Well America doesn't senselessly launch bombs into space to blow up satellites for show and threaten both domestic and international space activity now, does it?

Comerciante wrote:
Also is it really "several" nations conducting a specific test when you can count the participants on one hand?

Comerciante wrote:America tested an ASAT.

Nobody got hurt.

Russia tested an ASAT.

It was in the ballpark distance of destroying or damaging the ISS.

Russia is getting shit not because "Russia Bad" it's getting shit because it was almost responsible for a massive international incident.

Also is it really "several" nations conducting a specific test when you can count the participants on one hand?

Dogmeat wrote:Maybe the answer to the Drake Equation is just that every advanced civilization has a Russia. And so nobody gets to do space travel.

Laka Strolistandiler wrote:

Dogmeat wrote:Maybe the answer to the Drake Equation is just that every advanced civilization has a Russia. And so nobody gets to do space travel.

Indeed because my country is the only one to test weapons in space, sure, no other state has ever did this. You westerners are always comparing us to Slytherin or something lol

Comerciante wrote:America tested an ASAT.

Nobody got hurt.

Russia tested an ASAT.

It was in the ballpark distance of destroying or damaging the ISS.

Russia is getting shit not because "Russia Bad" it's getting shit because it was almost responsible for a massive international incident.

Also is it really "several" nations conducting a specific test when you can count the participants on one hand?

Dogmeat wrote:

Laka Strolistandiler wrote:Indeed because my country is the only one to test weapons in space, sure, no other state has ever did this. You westerners are always comparing us to Slytherin or something lol

Comerciante wrote:America tested an ASAT.

Nobody got hurt.

Russia tested an ASAT.

It was in the ballpark distance of destroying or damaging the ISS.

Russia is getting shit not because "Russia Bad" it's getting shit because it was almost responsible for a massive international incident.

Also is it really "several" nations conducting a specific test when you can count the participants on one hand?

...NASA said that during the first three days after the destructive incident, the space station didn't have to perform any space junk-dodging maneuvers. The highest risk of collision has now passed, the agency added.