# Space Force! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 21, 2019, 9:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-force/845176 "2019-12-21T09:13:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2019, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-force/845176/41 "2019-12-23T19:51:54Z")
A Cyber Force makes more sense than a Space Force. The need for cybersecurity is constant over all of the existing branches of the Service, as well as for non-military American targets (like, say, social media platforms that can be hijacked for propaganda purposes to influence US elections). And the skills needed in that domain have no overlap whatsoever with the skills needed for the conventional roles of any of the other services. But really, creating any sort of new branch of the military is going about matters in exactly the wrong way. In modern militaries, all of the forces work together, constantly in support of each other. If anything, we should be unifying all of the current branches of the military into a single service. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2019, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-force/845176/42 "2019-12-23T20:10:05Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Sorry, I meant have more funding than a few civilian personnel. Oh, of course. But you said that your friend told you that the Space Force has less restrict funding lines. This is factually untrue at this point in time, and there’s no reason to believe that they will have any more flexibility with funding lines in the future. Congress has simultaneously been giving broader acquisition authorities to the other services and taking away flexibility in funding lines, so anyone’s best guess is that Space Force will be treated similarly. There is literally nothing inherent about the Space Force, either in concept or legislation, that backs up his assertion. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2019, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-force/845176/43 "2019-12-23T20:12:13Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Oh, of course. But you said that your friend told you that the Space Force has less restrict funding lines. This is factually untrue at this point in time, and there’s no reason to believe that they will have any more flexibility with funding lines in the future. Congress has simultaneously been giving broader acquisition authorities to the other services and taking away flexibility in funding lines, so anyone’s best guess is that Space Force will be treated similarly. There is literally nothing inherent about the Space Force, either in concept or legislation, that backs up his assertion. Strange. I doubt the Space Force will have to spend money on the F-22, but I could be wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2019, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-force/845176/44 "2019-12-23T20:23:17Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Strange. I doubt the Space Force will have to spend money on the F-22, but I could be wrong. Thinking about this further, maybe he was thinking of the Space Development Agency, which was created last year, and originally intended to be a kind of hybrid of DARPA (which does have a great degree of funding flexibility) and a centralized authority for all space acquisitions for the Space Force and others. It has been scaled back to being only about one highly suspect satellite program, and no longer having any reporting to the Air Force or Space Force. The irony of this terrible idea is that the Space Force bureaucracy - whether it costs half a billion per year or two billion a year - will steal money from all other military programs. In other words, instead of spending a billion more per year on satellites and whatnot, we will spend it on overhead. Another reason why this is such a fundamentally dumb idea. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2019, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-force/845176/45 "2019-12-23T20:32:39Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Thinking about this further, maybe he was thinking of the Space Development Agency, which was created last year, and originally intended to be a kind of hybrid of DARPA (which does have a great degree of funding flexibility) and a centralized authority for all space acquisitions for the Space Force and others. It has been scaled back to being only about one highly suspect satellite program, and no longer having any reporting to the Air Force or Space Force. > > The irony of this terrible idea is that the Space Force bureaucracy - whether it costs half a billion per year or two billion a year - will steal money from all other military programs. In other words, instead of spending a billion more per year on satellites and whatnot, we will spend it on overhead. Another reason why this is such a fundamentally dumb idea. I’m asking him specifics now but I constantly laugh at him about it. It’s just a horrible idea, I agree. ---
**Author:** ![Ike\_Witt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ike_witt/32/283_2.png) [@Ike\_Witt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ike_Witt)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2019, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-force/845176/46 "2019-12-24T00:14:18Z")
I suggest we send Trump into space to scout locations for their space station. ---
**Author:** ![RioRico](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f04885/32.png) [@RioRico](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RioRico)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2019, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-force/845176/47 "2019-12-24T00:33:12Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > A Cyber Force makes more sense than a Space Force. The need for cybersecurity is constant over all of the existing branches of the Service, as well as for non-military American targets (like, say, social media platforms that can be hijacked for propaganda purposes to influence US elections). And the skills needed in that domain have no overlap whatsoever with the skills needed for the conventional roles of any of the other services. Logically true. But fiefdoms… > [@](#): > > But really, creating any sort of new branch of the military is going about matters in exactly the wrong way. In modern militaries, all of the forces work together, constantly in support of each other. If anything, we should be unifying all of the current branches of the military into a single service. But fiefdoms. More services / bureaus / forces means more admins with realms to control and more competitors to wrassle for funding and influence. Combining such units threatens massive redundancy. All those general officers will have to find honest jobs! Do we know how a USSF was presented to this POTUS? Who designed the animations? ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2019, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-force/845176/48 "2019-12-24T00:40:36Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Thinking about this further, maybe he was thinking of the Space Development Agency, which was created last year, and originally intended to be a kind of hybrid of DARPA (which does have a great degree of funding flexibility) and a centralized authority for all space acquisitions for the Space Force and others. It has been scaled back to being only about one highly suspect satellite program, and no longer having any reporting to the Air Force or Space Force. > > The irony of this terrible idea is that the Space Force bureaucracy - whether it costs half a billion per year or two billion a year - will steal money from all other military programs. In other words, instead of spending a billion more per year on satellites and whatnot, we will spend it on overhead. Another reason why this is such a fundamentally dumb idea. So, speaking with him tonight, it’s more of a “There was no 4-star General advocating for Space capabilities within the DoD. Space capabilities were at the whim of the AF, who would rather have money for traditional AF things, and since the 3-star AF Programmer is always a pilot, money always went to non-space AF capes first.” ---
**Author:** ![I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/i_love_me_vol.i/32/521_2.png) [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_Love_Me_Vol.I)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2019, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-force/845176/49 "2019-12-24T01:01:20Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > I think we should run with this theme and create an “Undersea Force”, which is just like the navy except underwater, and then we can create a “Shore Guard”, which is just like the Coast Guard but just stays right next to the shore. Littoraly right next to the shore? ---
**Author:** ![Moriarty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/moriarty/32/49_2.png) [@Moriarty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moriarty)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2019, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-force/845176/50 "2019-12-24T01:29:16Z")
> [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](#): > > Littoraly right next to the shore? Well, wherever Sally sells sea shells. Just as long as it’s not the coast. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2019, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-force/845176/51 "2019-12-24T02:33:37Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > So, speaking with him tonight, it’s more of a “There was no 4-star General advocating for Space capabilities within the DoD. Space capabilities were at the whim of the AF, who would rather have money for traditional AF things, and since the 3-star AF Programmer is always a pilot, money always went to non-space AF capes first.” Oh sure, I’ve heard this before. A few problems with it: 1. The last two SecAFs were off-the-charts pro-space. Investment in space programs went up by something like 30 percent over the last two years. 2. Congratulations, you now have the weakest four-star general in the Pentagon. Let’s see how powerful he will be. 3. There’s a one-to-one relationship with increasing overhead costs and losing buying power. The defense budget is likely to be flat for the next several years, so we are actually moving backward on buying any capabilities, be they space, air, land, or whatever. 4. The overriding problem with space capabilities is NOT money. It is acquisition problems. SBIRS is probably the worst acquisition program in DoD history. GPS III satellites were robustly funded, but the PNT payload was screwed up so the whole program was delayed; and oh yeah, the ground control system doesn’t work, was supposed to cost $2 billion, and is now costing $6.5 billion and rising. And, the Pentagon created a monopoly on military space launch _on purpose_ and years later we ended up paying two to three times as much as we should have for rocket launches (though with extreme reliability!) Those are not money problems, and arguably they are the result of too much money. The main problem with space isn’t that there aren’t enough satellites. The problem is that we have a long way to go with integrating space into war fighting, and need to come up with better options for what happens when we lose access to space because the Chinese or Russians are blowing up, blinding, or jamming our satellites. The bulk of those issues (not all) are best dealt with through the new combatant command. The loss of access to space is actually best dealt with by non-space people. For example, the Army has been doing interesting work on surviving the loss of GPS. Anyway, I know we agree on this. I just had to get it off my chest. ---
**Author:** ![Declan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ecae2f/32.png) [@Declan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Declan)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2019, 3:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-force/845176/52 "2019-12-25T03:39:09Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > Seems it’s gonna be a thing, sorta: [Space Force will start small but let Trump claim a big win](https://apnews.com/0ef42bcb81ccba91eed9384cfb5e9fcb)The crux of the biscuit is this: I don’t believe that this will remain it’s own entity for very long at all. I doubt that 10 years will pass before the personnel and mission are absorbed into an existing branch of the military and/or NASA. I give even chances that is Space Force survives, they try and absorb NASA into the military but I don’t think that 60%+/- would continue to work there if that happened. > > So how much will this cost us and how long will it last, do y’all think? > > As a secondary debate/point of contention: does Space Force have any value at all and why/why not? In time , it will absorb the airforce. The jump from 5 gen to 6 gen fighter is going to be more aerospace than pure airbreather, while the follow on bomber to the B-21 will be aerospace as well. Pure airforce missions will be allocated to cargo flights and predator drones and will most likely be National Guard. Time on station beyond 5 days and exo orbital will be Navy. ---
**Author:** ![Declan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ecae2f/32.png) [@Declan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Declan)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2019, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-force/845176/53 "2019-12-25T03:41:16Z")
> [@outlierrn](#): > > I dunno, STAR fleet, isn’t that a bit like calling it the world series? Navy called dibs on star fleet ---
**Author:** ![Declan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ecae2f/32.png) [@Declan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Declan)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2019, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-force/845176/54 "2019-12-25T03:42:23Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > You’re all ignoring the most important question: what are the uniforms going to look like? Im betting its going to be right out of Ad Astra ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2019, 6:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-force/845176/55 "2019-12-25T06:22:30Z")
Haven’t seen that yet. I have to say, though, every time I see the title of this thread I hear it shouted by Benny the 80’s Space Guy from _The Lego Movie_. SPACE FORCE!! ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2019, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-force/845176/56 "2019-12-26T20:15:07Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > The main problem with space isn’t that there aren’t enough satellites. The main problem is we don’t have enough Space Marines on bug hunts! ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2019, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-force/845176/57 "2019-12-26T20:49:50Z")
Not to detract from the piledriving Trump, but isn’t he just giving everyone on the planet carte blanche to militarize space and escalate henceforth ? I thought that was a big no-no since the Cold War. Also I thought they were treaties about that (not that it matters one iota to Trump obviously, but yanno) ? ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2019, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-force/845176/58 "2019-12-26T20:53:11Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > There are actually 5 domains - land, sea, air, space, and cyberspace. Your utter lack of foresight is why the Molemen/Morlock Concordat will annihilate us. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2019, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-force/845176/59 "2019-12-26T21:03:49Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > Not to detract from the piledriving Trump, but isn’t he just giving everyone on the planet carte blanche to militarize space and escalate henceforth ? I thought that was a big no-no since the Cold War. Also I thought they were treaties about that (not that it matters one iota to Trump obviously, but yanno) ? Indeed: the US ratified the [Outer Space Treaty](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty) in 1967. > [@](#): > > Among the Outer Space Treaty’s main points are that it prohibits the placing of nuclear weapons in space, it limits the use of the Moon and all other celestial bodies to peaceful purposes only, and establishes that space shall be free for exploration and use by all nations, but that no nation may claim sovereignty of outer space or any celestial body. The Outer Space Treaty does not ban military activities within space, military space forces, or the weaponization of space, with the exception of the placement of weapons of mass destruction in space.[6][7] It is mostly a non-armament treaty and offers insufficient and ambiguous regulations to newer space activities such as lunar and asteroid mining It’s filled with nice thoughts but is also a toothless. Still, as the Wikipedia article notes: > [@](#): > > The Outer Space Treaty represents the basic legal framework of international space law. ---
**Author:** ![I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/i_love_me_vol.i/32/521_2.png) [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_Love_Me_Vol.I)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2019, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-force/845176/60 "2019-12-26T23:23:15Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > I think we should run with this theme and create an “Undersea Force”, which is just like the navy except underwater, and then we can create a “Shore Guard”, which is just like the Coast Guard but just stays right next to the shore. > [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](#): > > Littoraly right next to the shore? OK. I’m sorry but I have to do this: So I don’t get no mad props for my little literally littoral word-play? Damn!! What’s up with that?!?! After years of watching puns being tossed about with abandon here on the Dope I finally come up with a good one and nobody even notices it. Rats! Maybe I’m doing it wrong. :mad::p;);):D:rolleyes: ETA: I prolly shoulda gone with: “Are you serious? A littoral ‘shore guard’?” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-force/845176.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-force/845176.md?page=4)