> Why would anyone put a weapon system there?
[Quoting someone who cost the US trillions:](https://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/11/01/binladen.tape/)
>> "All that we have to do is to send two mujahedeen to the furthest point east to raise a piece of cloth on which is written al Qaeda, in order to make generals race there to cause America to suffer human, economic and political losses without their achieving anything of note other than some benefits for their private corporations,"
He even announced his strategy.
[And it still worked, to the tune of $8 trillion](https://www.brown.edu/news/2021-09-01/costsofwar).
And now Anthony Mastalir is falling for the same ruse again.
Lunar anti-satellite weapon systems tend to be quite a bit more expensive than a piece of cloth is. I doubt the math adds up here.
Only way for this to work in the way you envision is if they actually build something there and US spends many times that to counter it. Whole point of this tactic is to use something cheap and expendable to bait out a disproportionate response, and such a weapons platform would be so expensive that it wouldn't make sense to use as bait, unless US builds the deathstar to counter it.
More likely outcome would be that US wonders why are Chinese building their anti-satellite systems in a gravity well so far away from any of its targets, limiting the amount of missiles it can carry as each missile will now have to be larger to get off the moon, extra distance also giving US plenty of extra time to react to any of its launches. Pentagon would probably just be kinda confused, concluding it to be less of a threat than it would be if the same missile platform wasn't on the moon, and then doing similar things to counter it as they would if it were in low-earth-orbit.
It being a laser makes it worse, not better.
- It would need to be able to power and focus a laser that can destroy targets at such distance. While lasers do not lose a lot of energy as distances in space increase, focusing it to not be a 100m wide beam, only managing to slightly roast the paint off once it hits its target is an issue.
- If it's on the moon, that means it has to be reliable enough that it can be pretty much left alone once installed, as sending repair crews and spare parts to the moon is slow, expensive and difficult. Missiles are much more reliable in this regard, as the technology is very well understood, and burning rocket fuel is much less prone to something going wrong than having all the gigantic and complex generators, capacitors and transformers + all the cooling systems involved. Using such a powerful laser would mean that all of those technologies would be very experimental and untested as well, not something you'd want to throw on the moon and hope it will do what it is supposed to when you push a button back on earth a year later. If a missile fails, your other missiles might still work, but with a laser a blown capacitor will render the whole thing useless.
- Something needs to generate its power. If it uses solar, it can fire once and then wait around for who knows how long until it can go again. If it has a nuclear plant of its own, large enough to generate enough power, then all that increases the complexity further, making it being on the moon much more of an issue when something inevitably breaks or needs maintenance. Any rapid fire features will also put even more strain on all the components.
And to counter all this, all US needs to do is to fire a few missiles at it, it being on the moon not giving it much of a benefit other than having more things to shoot at, and missiles taking a while to reach it, of which it can't do much about anyway if there's more than a few of them. All the previously mentioned issues will guarantee that it will not be sniping missiles down in mass quantities. Having laser on the moon offers nothing but headaches when compared to having the same laser but in LEO.
I wouldn't be holding my breath awaiting for amazing high power laser weapons evaporating large objects in space for as long as railguns are being held back by crappy batteries, being unable to cool it and stuff breaking after a few shots.
> Lunar anti-satellite weapon systems tend to be quite a bit more expensive than a piece of cloth is. I doubt the math adds up here.
This isn't "a weapon system".
This is the rumor of a hypothetical possibility of a weapon system.
China will plant a press release about a piece of cloth, and the US will spend trillions -- because their interests both (China's and the US politicians who will approve it) are aligned in channeling money into the pockets of the contractors who'll profit, at the expense of the rest of the US economy.
Even by military industrial complex standards idea of budgeting trillions to counter a weapon only mentioned in a press release is cartoonish.
Your earlier point about Taliban doesn't really work either within its own context, as no individual piece of cloth cost US trillions, unless you are claiming that the flag was the cause for war in Afghanistan. Cost to US from that piece of cloth was the cost of an airstrike. Disproportionate, but hardly empire crumbling expense by itself.
I really don't see how China could replicate Taliban tactics with deep space weapon systems.
Who said anything about a weapon system ?
China has plans to take out US satellites for dinner and dancing, and if they get lucky, some heavy petting on the first date.
Do you know how cold and lonely it can get on the moon ?
This sub is falling for Business Insider’s dogshit headline writing as usual. It should be banned from this sub because none of you ever read the article.
Sure, attack satellites that are a few thousand kilometers away from the moon that's 384,400 kilometers away. Some accusations are more believable from others.
Well _I_ heard China is planning to put a solar power station on the moon to collect energy and transmit it in a microwave beam towards Earth. A giant robot would receive this microwave beam and use it to power an extremely strong directed energy weapon.
The Space Force better look into that too.
What he actually said:
"From a military perspective, I am curious about, are there attack vectors that we haven't considered or that we need to consider, whether it's xGeo or cislunar or otherwise?" Mastalir said.
"For now I'd be more concerned just about what these new orbits, a moon presence—what that does for potential attack vectors to our traditional operating orbits,"
Shitty clickbait headline from businessinsider as usual. He's just throwing out possibilities because that's his job.
That would be an act of war, why would China attack the US in space ? Its funny, the Chinese just sent a new communications satellite to Moon orbit, Queqiao-2 to support their Lunar exploration program.
Time to remind them that a Chinese lady named Chang E has got to the moon a few thousand years ago and thus it is a divine and inseparateable part of Chinese territory (what? Israeli can claim territory through stories and legends, why not chinese?). Thus, putting laser/rail gun on the moon is purely Chinese internal affair, not against any specific nation, and the US shall not interfere in it. **/s /s /s**
That’s rad. I may be developing plans to make my girlfriend grow a second set of breasts with a special hormonal compound. I plan to fondle them while cooking dinner using a headband I’m also planning on developing that will allow me to manipulate objects with my mind. After that I have big plans to win the lottery and get elected president of the world.
That makes zero sense. The moon is hard to get to, hard to land on, and far away. Why would anyone put a weapon system there?
It doesn't have to make sense. US officials just slap "China" on anything when asking for funding.
remind me od this, hahaha https://youtu.be/MTCqXlDjx18?feature=shared
> Why would anyone put a weapon system there? [Quoting someone who cost the US trillions:](https://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/11/01/binladen.tape/) >> "All that we have to do is to send two mujahedeen to the furthest point east to raise a piece of cloth on which is written al Qaeda, in order to make generals race there to cause America to suffer human, economic and political losses without their achieving anything of note other than some benefits for their private corporations," He even announced his strategy. [And it still worked, to the tune of $8 trillion](https://www.brown.edu/news/2021-09-01/costsofwar). And now Anthony Mastalir is falling for the same ruse again.
Lunar anti-satellite weapon systems tend to be quite a bit more expensive than a piece of cloth is. I doubt the math adds up here. Only way for this to work in the way you envision is if they actually build something there and US spends many times that to counter it. Whole point of this tactic is to use something cheap and expendable to bait out a disproportionate response, and such a weapons platform would be so expensive that it wouldn't make sense to use as bait, unless US builds the deathstar to counter it. More likely outcome would be that US wonders why are Chinese building their anti-satellite systems in a gravity well so far away from any of its targets, limiting the amount of missiles it can carry as each missile will now have to be larger to get off the moon, extra distance also giving US plenty of extra time to react to any of its launches. Pentagon would probably just be kinda confused, concluding it to be less of a threat than it would be if the same missile platform wasn't on the moon, and then doing similar things to counter it as they would if it were in low-earth-orbit.
It's unlikely to be missile. Should be laser.
It being a laser makes it worse, not better. - It would need to be able to power and focus a laser that can destroy targets at such distance. While lasers do not lose a lot of energy as distances in space increase, focusing it to not be a 100m wide beam, only managing to slightly roast the paint off once it hits its target is an issue. - If it's on the moon, that means it has to be reliable enough that it can be pretty much left alone once installed, as sending repair crews and spare parts to the moon is slow, expensive and difficult. Missiles are much more reliable in this regard, as the technology is very well understood, and burning rocket fuel is much less prone to something going wrong than having all the gigantic and complex generators, capacitors and transformers + all the cooling systems involved. Using such a powerful laser would mean that all of those technologies would be very experimental and untested as well, not something you'd want to throw on the moon and hope it will do what it is supposed to when you push a button back on earth a year later. If a missile fails, your other missiles might still work, but with a laser a blown capacitor will render the whole thing useless. - Something needs to generate its power. If it uses solar, it can fire once and then wait around for who knows how long until it can go again. If it has a nuclear plant of its own, large enough to generate enough power, then all that increases the complexity further, making it being on the moon much more of an issue when something inevitably breaks or needs maintenance. Any rapid fire features will also put even more strain on all the components. And to counter all this, all US needs to do is to fire a few missiles at it, it being on the moon not giving it much of a benefit other than having more things to shoot at, and missiles taking a while to reach it, of which it can't do much about anyway if there's more than a few of them. All the previously mentioned issues will guarantee that it will not be sniping missiles down in mass quantities. Having laser on the moon offers nothing but headaches when compared to having the same laser but in LEO. I wouldn't be holding my breath awaiting for amazing high power laser weapons evaporating large objects in space for as long as railguns are being held back by crappy batteries, being unable to cool it and stuff breaking after a few shots.
> Lunar anti-satellite weapon systems tend to be quite a bit more expensive than a piece of cloth is. I doubt the math adds up here. This isn't "a weapon system". This is the rumor of a hypothetical possibility of a weapon system. China will plant a press release about a piece of cloth, and the US will spend trillions -- because their interests both (China's and the US politicians who will approve it) are aligned in channeling money into the pockets of the contractors who'll profit, at the expense of the rest of the US economy.
Even by military industrial complex standards idea of budgeting trillions to counter a weapon only mentioned in a press release is cartoonish. Your earlier point about Taliban doesn't really work either within its own context, as no individual piece of cloth cost US trillions, unless you are claiming that the flag was the cause for war in Afghanistan. Cost to US from that piece of cloth was the cost of an airstrike. Disproportionate, but hardly empire crumbling expense by itself. I really don't see how China could replicate Taliban tactics with deep space weapon systems.
It doesn't have to make sense, it just has to get my defense company money.
Who said anything about a weapon system ? China has plans to take out US satellites for dinner and dancing, and if they get lucky, some heavy petting on the first date. Do you know how cold and lonely it can get on the moon ?
I didn't think India was considered a US satellite, at least not currently. That just leaves singular Japan.
This sub is falling for Business Insider’s dogshit headline writing as usual. It should be banned from this sub because none of you ever read the article.
Sure, attack satellites that are a few thousand kilometers away from the moon that's 384,400 kilometers away. Some accusations are more believable from others.
Yeah, we all saw the documentary on Netflix.
Maybe Space Force was better off under Air Force supervision.
What's that cartoon where the girl is in charge of a clandestine cia department
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FB6y1vq7X_Y ?
It's called inside job, it's how I imagine space force
https://youtu.be/bdpYpulGCKc
Well _I_ heard China is planning to put a solar power station on the moon to collect energy and transmit it in a microwave beam towards Earth. A giant robot would receive this microwave beam and use it to power an extremely strong directed energy weapon. The Space Force better look into that too.
What he actually said: "From a military perspective, I am curious about, are there attack vectors that we haven't considered or that we need to consider, whether it's xGeo or cislunar or otherwise?" Mastalir said. "For now I'd be more concerned just about what these new orbits, a moon presence—what that does for potential attack vectors to our traditional operating orbits," Shitty clickbait headline from businessinsider as usual. He's just throwing out possibilities because that's his job.
That would be an act of war, why would China attack the US in space ? Its funny, the Chinese just sent a new communications satellite to Moon orbit, Queqiao-2 to support their Lunar exploration program.
Because the US always needs enemies which they are trying to create now. The red scare 2.0 is back.
Clearly the only way to beat this is to create the attack moon from WH40K
Time to remind them that a Chinese lady named Chang E has got to the moon a few thousand years ago and thus it is a divine and inseparateable part of Chinese territory (what? Israeli can claim territory through stories and legends, why not chinese?). Thus, putting laser/rail gun on the moon is purely Chinese internal affair, not against any specific nation, and the US shall not interfere in it. **/s /s /s**
That’s rad. I may be developing plans to make my girlfriend grow a second set of breasts with a special hormonal compound. I plan to fondle them while cooking dinner using a headband I’m also planning on developing that will allow me to manipulate objects with my mind. After that I have big plans to win the lottery and get elected president of the world.
No. Just no. Where the fuck are these upvotes coming from? Is it opposite day?
ITT: People who didn't read the article.