[QUOTE=DWMarch]
Everything I know about space-based combat comes from Tom Clancy’s Red Storm Rising but having said that… Hasn’t the US had the ability to shoot down satellites for 20 some years now? Why the concern all of a sudden? Why doesn’t the US just say “Okay, you shoot down one of our satellites and we’ll shoot down all of yours!”?
[/QUOTE]
There are two issues here; one is the very real concern of orbital debris, and the other is political.
The first is a signficant concern. Demolishing a satellite in orbit leaves thousands of pieces of debris from the size of small flakes of paint up to major pieces of structure, all moving at orbital velocities, i.e. several km/s. Should your communications satellite, space telescope, or Shuttle intersect the debris field while crossing that orbit, major damage to flight or protection systems could occur. Pollution from older satellites and space boosters is enough of a concern, but at least it’s largely intact and trackable; the small remains of a demolished satellite are not and represent a significant hazard.
The second is political. Yes, the United States and the former U.S.S.R. both developed and performed limited testing on ASAT weapons. They also made an agreement not to further test (and at least, ostensibly, to develop) such weapons. It’s arguable that the U.S. has not held to its end of the bargin (and I highly suspect the same of the pre-collapse Soviet Union) but no outright testing or deployment has occured. However, for another party to come out and openly display both intention and sufficient technical prowess to develop such weapons begs for competition; as others have pointed out, the U.S. and Europe are highly dependent upon satellites, and for a nation like China to display the capability to attack them is inherently threatening. Hence, it may very well result in another space race, and worse yet, one in which one party is significantly disadvantaged in initial capability and thus willing to take more risks.
It is somewhat disingeneous to suggest that China should not develop such weapons while the United States still holds the capability and refuses to unilaterally disarm. Naturally, the Chinese want to develop equivilent capability, if for no other reason than to compete on the world stage in a chest puffing competition, though I doubt that this is their exclusive aim; the Chinese seem to have become relatively low-key and very practically-minded in the post-Tiananmen Square era. (The goverment is still run by a bunch of evil bastards, but they’re smart evil bastards, which is more than certain countries can say currently.)
Regarding the OP’s question regarding the Bush Administration’s thrust to return to the Moon and establish a permanent base, it has always been my contention that this was driven entirely by advances in China’s manned space program. Despite the apparent insincerity of the actual effort (about which I’ll restrain my commentary, only to note that said plans are seriously incomplete) it does serve as an excuse for militarization of space which was backburnered after the Reagan-era and the Challenger loss. As long as China claims to be going to the Moon, we will to. If they stop, so will we. It’s a sad, stupid way to do business, but at least it’s an impetus to do something rather than muck about on the increasingly hobbled and irrelevent International Space Station.
Stranger