Pigs in Space
War is bad, killing people wholesale is criminal but the ‘hawks’, having failed to deliver a land based missile defense system are now pushing for a space based one.
Death not just from above but from near space. Weapons systems that could attack targets on the ground ANYWHERE on the planet.
Anywhere, even here.
Ironically, there are few things more fleeting than a secret and all it would take to put such a deadly weapon into the hands of ‘terrorists’ is a more powerful transmitter than the one normally used to control the unmanned satellite.
Does the ‘need’ for such a powerful weapon exist? Currently there are no ‘official’ orbiting weapons platforms in near space but rumor has it both the Soviets and the US already have armed satellites in orbit.
Objects dropped or launched from twenty-three miles up will impact their earthbound targets at 7,200 miles per hour. The resulting force of this kind of impact is equal to a small nuclear bomb.
Why would we want this? What purpose would it serve?
Would such a weapon be used to enforce the status quo if say, the price of fossil fuel quadrupled overnight?
Our entire way of life depends, let me repeat that depends on cheap, abundant energy. A sharp spike in energy prices or the ‘sudden’ loss of supply would result in the social clock being turned back not a hundred but a thousand years.
No one knows for sure how much oil is left in the ground. IF the supply was dwindling and the insiders knew this, would they tell us?
The resulting panic caused by such a revelation would tear our social fabric to shreds in a matter of hours. People are no longer self-sufficient.
Without fuel to keep food supplies moving, a crisis beyond anyone’s imagining will develop in less than a week.
But that’s just one potential reason.
In another ‘cost saving’ measure the military is experimenting with robots. Armed robots that are today operated by humans but in the future, given the cost of soldiers, will be self-guided.
Think about that one for a minute. One man in charge of battalions of killer robots…can you say Napoleon? That president could declare himself king and there isn’t anything anyone could do about it.
Automatic weapons are the domain of the military; there would be no way for the civilian population to defend itself.
Not that those who would appropriate the hundreds of billions of dollars (from you) to achieve this goal are in any way worried about your safety, it’s theirs they’re worried about.
Human soldiers are reluctant to fire on their own people, a serious character flaw when it comes to protecting the status quo. Robots on the other hand will attack without hesitation.
Supposing that the ‘good’ people in Washington would never allow the military to harm those they’re sworn to protect.
This still raises the specter of an army of machines that would be capable of invading a ‘hostile’ land with little or no loss of life on our side.
The ‘on our side’ are the operative words here but the machines, even very sophisticated ones, would be as likely as human soldiers to kill indiscriminately, with this inevitable outcome being labeled a 'mistake' once the facts come to light.
Until, in this tit for tat world of ours, the enemy unleashed it’s robots, or nukes on us.
Make no mistake about it. A nation thus invaded would not ‘waste’ its robotic forces battling ours; they’d return the favor of the invasion, inflicting upon our civilian population what we inflicted upon theirs.
Even supposing we stuck to soft targets, nations that lack the capability to retaliate in kind. Our reputation being what it is, we’re only a hair’s breadth from being branded a rogue nation.
What’s to stop a preemptive strike made by the combined forces of those who rightly fear US hegemony?
Is it possible the world’s only super power is in the hands of some very dangerous people? Why would we, with no rivals, strive to put weapons in space and plot to build a robotic fighting force that will never question orders?
War is bad and taking humans out of the equation is only going to make it worse.
Time to go back ‘on message’.
World peace is not possible as long as we suffer the few to ‘compete’ (often with unspeakable violence) for the slender resources of this, our one and only home.
It will not be until the profit motive is removed from the world that universal peace will finally be possible.
By replacing ownership with management, the world’s resources will finally be used to benefit all mankind. Those countless millions of us that don't 'own' will be the losers under the president's 'ownership society'.
Capitalist utopia CAN'T exist because there isn't enough market share for everyone to be in business for themselves.
With that being the case, we should seriously question laws that allow anyone to own while others cannot.
By eliminating the fraudulent currency used to enslave us we will prosper as one people with one purpose.
By letting the law stand alone, we will regain our freedom and hold onto to it as no one will have the power to enslave us with their laws again.
A perfect world? Hardly. The most we can hope for is a level playing field and freedom from being exploited by others.
Yeah, there’s more to it than just eliminating ownership but the system works. This same system produced a stable society that lasted for tens of thousands of years. There’s no reason it won’t do the same for us.
Thanks for letting me inside your head,
Gegner
Death not just from above but from near space. Weapons systems that could attack targets on the ground ANYWHERE on the planet.
Anywhere, even here.
Ironically, there are few things more fleeting than a secret and all it would take to put such a deadly weapon into the hands of ‘terrorists’ is a more powerful transmitter than the one normally used to control the unmanned satellite.
Does the ‘need’ for such a powerful weapon exist? Currently there are no ‘official’ orbiting weapons platforms in near space but rumor has it both the Soviets and the US already have armed satellites in orbit.
Objects dropped or launched from twenty-three miles up will impact their earthbound targets at 7,200 miles per hour. The resulting force of this kind of impact is equal to a small nuclear bomb.
Why would we want this? What purpose would it serve?
Would such a weapon be used to enforce the status quo if say, the price of fossil fuel quadrupled overnight?
Our entire way of life depends, let me repeat that depends on cheap, abundant energy. A sharp spike in energy prices or the ‘sudden’ loss of supply would result in the social clock being turned back not a hundred but a thousand years.
No one knows for sure how much oil is left in the ground. IF the supply was dwindling and the insiders knew this, would they tell us?
The resulting panic caused by such a revelation would tear our social fabric to shreds in a matter of hours. People are no longer self-sufficient.
Without fuel to keep food supplies moving, a crisis beyond anyone’s imagining will develop in less than a week.
But that’s just one potential reason.
In another ‘cost saving’ measure the military is experimenting with robots. Armed robots that are today operated by humans but in the future, given the cost of soldiers, will be self-guided.
Think about that one for a minute. One man in charge of battalions of killer robots…can you say Napoleon? That president could declare himself king and there isn’t anything anyone could do about it.
Automatic weapons are the domain of the military; there would be no way for the civilian population to defend itself.
Not that those who would appropriate the hundreds of billions of dollars (from you) to achieve this goal are in any way worried about your safety, it’s theirs they’re worried about.
Human soldiers are reluctant to fire on their own people, a serious character flaw when it comes to protecting the status quo. Robots on the other hand will attack without hesitation.
Supposing that the ‘good’ people in Washington would never allow the military to harm those they’re sworn to protect.
This still raises the specter of an army of machines that would be capable of invading a ‘hostile’ land with little or no loss of life on our side.
The ‘on our side’ are the operative words here but the machines, even very sophisticated ones, would be as likely as human soldiers to kill indiscriminately, with this inevitable outcome being labeled a 'mistake' once the facts come to light.
Until, in this tit for tat world of ours, the enemy unleashed it’s robots, or nukes on us.
Make no mistake about it. A nation thus invaded would not ‘waste’ its robotic forces battling ours; they’d return the favor of the invasion, inflicting upon our civilian population what we inflicted upon theirs.
Even supposing we stuck to soft targets, nations that lack the capability to retaliate in kind. Our reputation being what it is, we’re only a hair’s breadth from being branded a rogue nation.
What’s to stop a preemptive strike made by the combined forces of those who rightly fear US hegemony?
Is it possible the world’s only super power is in the hands of some very dangerous people? Why would we, with no rivals, strive to put weapons in space and plot to build a robotic fighting force that will never question orders?
War is bad and taking humans out of the equation is only going to make it worse.
Time to go back ‘on message’.
World peace is not possible as long as we suffer the few to ‘compete’ (often with unspeakable violence) for the slender resources of this, our one and only home.
It will not be until the profit motive is removed from the world that universal peace will finally be possible.
By replacing ownership with management, the world’s resources will finally be used to benefit all mankind. Those countless millions of us that don't 'own' will be the losers under the president's 'ownership society'.
Capitalist utopia CAN'T exist because there isn't enough market share for everyone to be in business for themselves.
With that being the case, we should seriously question laws that allow anyone to own while others cannot.
By eliminating the fraudulent currency used to enslave us we will prosper as one people with one purpose.
By letting the law stand alone, we will regain our freedom and hold onto to it as no one will have the power to enslave us with their laws again.
A perfect world? Hardly. The most we can hope for is a level playing field and freedom from being exploited by others.
Yeah, there’s more to it than just eliminating ownership but the system works. This same system produced a stable society that lasted for tens of thousands of years. There’s no reason it won’t do the same for us.
Thanks for letting me inside your head,
Gegner
posted by Gegner at 12:07 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home