SCFI 2011

Amuricah

Weaponization Inevitable
___ of ___

Header = F2
This is the tag of the card = F3
Source Bolded = F4 Normal Card Text (un-underlined) = F5
The US dollar is under

[UNDERLINED MATERIAL = F6]

SCFI 2011
Amuricah Hyten 01

Weaponization Inevitable
___ of ___

Space Weapons Inevitable; Enemy Countries Recognize Our Dependence on Space

(John E. Director, Space Programs, Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Washington, D.C. A Sea of Peace or a Theater of War: Dealing with the Inevitable Conflict in Space January 4, 2001 http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/cc/Hyten.html DOA: 7/18/11 AW) In fact, in spite of indications to the contrary, conflict in space is inevitableand on a limited basis, has already occurred. Nations have already interfered with the space systems of other nationsthrough jamming and interferencesolely for commercial advantage.4 All the nations of the world have learned from the Persian Gulf War how critically dependent the United States is on the use of space assets to successfully operate in a theater of war. No nation would dare to challenge the United States in conventional military operations without attempting to somewhat level the information dominant battlefield that the U.S. currently enjoys; and this dominance, in great part, comes from space.

Numerous Countries Already on the Brink of Weaponizing Space

Collard-Wexler and Graham, 06 (Simon and Thomas, et al, Space Security 2006, Waterloo, Ontario, Space Security Index; July 2006
(Collard-Wexler: International Security Research and Outreach Program, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, Canada)(Graham: Cypress Fund for Peace and Security) http://www.spacesecurity.org/SSI2006.pdf DOA: 7/18/11 AW)

January, the

The number of states emphasizing the security uses of space in national policies continued to increase in 2005. In Japanese government introduced a plan to deploy a new generation of spy satellites. Japan also continued talks with the US throughout 2005 on furthering missile defense cooperation. The Israeli Air Force unveiled plans in June to launch additional surveillance satellites to boost intelligence capabilities and to manufacture micro-satellites that could provide information on combat zones (see Space Support for Military Operations). In addition, Yuval Steinitz, chairman of Israel's Defense and Foreign Affairs Committee, stated that defense and industry officials should consider future developments of "anti-satellite missiles" and "satellite-attacking lasers." India also continued to pay greater attention to the military uses of space. The Indian Air Force urged the government to set up a Strategic Aerospace Command to purportedly facilitate the development of capabilities to degrade space weapons in preparation for "future star wars." While some reports contend that the government has rejected the proposals,
Indian Air Force Chief S. P. Tyagi insists that the recommendations are still under consideration, particularly in light of the Parliamentary Standing Committee's declarations that India needs the ability to counter any threat from space. Media reports throughout 2005 revealed significant speculation

about China's space capabilities and military-related space intentions, although Chinese officials maintain that the country's space
program is solely for peaceful purposes.

A Militaristic Laser System Has Already ALMOST succeeded, Kludged Takeoff Was the Only Thing Preventing Weaponized Space
Day and Kennedy 10 (Dwayne A., Robert G. the Third, Day: American Space Historian Kennedy: Senior Systems Engineer at Tetra Tech Soviet Star Wars: The launch that saved the world from orbiting laser battle stations. January 01, 2010 Air and Space Magazine http://www.airspacemag.com/spaceexploration/Soviet-Star-Wars.html?c=y&page=5 DOA: 7/18/11 AW)
In the West, the debut of the Energia super-rocket was reported as a partial success; though the satellite had failed, the launcher itself operated perfectly. The U.S. government almost certainly had intelligence sensors pointed at the rocket as it flew, but what the
CIA or other agencies concluded about the payload remains classified. The failure of Polyus-Skif, combined with its immense expense, gave the program's opponents the ammunition they needed to kill it. Further Skif flights were canceled. Hardware being prepared was either scrapped or shoved to the sides of giant warehouses. And the laser never got close enough to launching for anyone to judge whether it would have worked. In his history of the project, Lantratov quotes Yuri Kornilov, the Skif-DM lead designer: "Of course, no one received any prizes or awards for their feverish, two-year-long, under-the-deadline work. The hundreds of teams that had created Polyus were not given an award or a word of thanks." In fact, after the Skif-DM fiasco, some were reprimanded or demoted. We still don't know the entire story. "Even today, there's a lot of sensitivity about the whole program," says Siddiqi. "Russians don't like to talk too much about it. And our understanding of Soviet responses to SDI still remains murky. It's clear that there was a lot of internal debate within the Soviet military-industrial elite about the effectiveness of space weapons. And the fact that the Soviets came so close to actually launching a weapon platform

suggests that the hardliners were in the driver's seat. It's scary to think what might have happened if Polyus had actually made it to orbit."

SCFI 2011
Amuricah

Weaponization Inevitable
___ of ___

Human Nature will Eventually Force Weapons into Space

Smith, 02 (M.V. Ten Propositions Regarding Spacepower Maxwell AFB, USAF Air University October 2002 http://www.spacedebate.org/evidence/1665
DOA: 7/18/11 AW) Regardless of which side of the argument is correct,

the historical relationship between man and his weapons provides insight into the probable future of space-based weapons. Robert L. O'Connell suggests that human nature -- not technology -- is at the root of weapons development. Covetous motives required early man to develop new ways to kill an opponent. Today's modern weapons are more lethal than the sticks and stones of ancient days, but their purpose is still to gain an advantage over an adversary. O'Connell suggests that humans will constantly develop new weapons as long as their imagination discovers and exploits timeless and eternal scientific principles such as quantum mechanics and relativistic physics, which may give them an advantage in war. Therefore, the very idea of weaponizing space becomes a driving force to do so, like the idea of splitting and fusing the atom made doing so
inevitable. "Because so much of this is a function of the physical universe and the laws that govern it, the process is, in a very real sense, beyond our control."

Even if it May Not Be Attractive Now, These Lasers Will Eventually Be Essential; Sooner = Better
Mueller 02 (Karl P. Prepared for presentation at the International Studies Association Annual Convention, works for the Research and Development
Nonprofit Global Thinktank Is the Weaponization of Space Inevitable? March 27, 2002 New Orleans DOA: 7/18/11 AW) Far and away

the best argument that space weaponization is inevitable, and the only such argument that can plausibly stand on its own, is that the military utility of space weapons for the United States and/or its enemies will soon be so great that the imperative of protecting national security will make space weaponization impossible for rational statesmen to resist.

Exactly what these weapons would do, and how, varies from one weaponization vision to another, but the standard expectation is that space weapons would eventually defend friendly satellites against enemy attack, attack enemy space weapons and other satellites that perform important military functions, shoot down long-range ballistic missiles, and conduct attacks against enemy air and surface forces and other terrestrial targets. Some weaponization advocates anticipate that space weapons will ultimately supplant many, or even most, types of terrestrial military forces; others have more modest expectations, but all predict that space weapons will be the best, and in some cases the only, systems available to fulfill at least some key military roles. The core of this inevitability

argument is that even (or especially) if the United States chooses not to build space weapons, other countries will certainly do so, in large part because of the great and still growing degree to which U.S. military operations depend upon what has traditionally been known as space force enhancement: the use of satellites to provide a vast array of services including
communications, reconnaissance, navigation, and missile launch warning, without which American military power would be crippled. This parallels the argument that the importance of satellites to the U.S. economy will make them an irresistible target, except that military satellites are far more indispensable, and successful attacks against a relatively small number of them could have a considerable military impact, for example by concealing preparations for an invasion or by disrupting U.S. operations at a critical juncture. Rivals of the United States might also find space-to-earth weapons to be a very attractive way to counter U.S. advantages in military power projection.