6 ms·
I couldn't disagree more. There are many parts in the world where people still have to deal with landmines that were laid in conflicts which ended long ago(i.e.
by artmageddon 11y ago
I couldn't disagree more. There are many parts in the world where people still have to deal with landmines that were laid in conflicts which ended long ago(i.e. decades). It's especially problematic because many of these fields aren't mapped or marked by any means, and kill people who unknowingly wander into them. War in space could mean filling Earth's low orbit with debris that travel in excess of thousands of kilometers per hour.
Going back to the landmine analogy, imagine being unable to get to your local supermarket because two warring nations planted landmines at every possible exit outside of your neighborhood. A war in space would be much worse.
- jotm 11y agoWhy use the landmine analogy when you can use the Space Race analogy? We ended up with GPS, high resolution cameras on satellites, the Hubble, and of course, intercontinental ballistic missiles, which have yet to kill anyone, thankfully... But I agree about the debris - then again, maybe they'll invent something to clear all that crap...
- artmageddon 11y ago> Why use the landmine analogy when you can use the Space Race analogy? I was focusing specifically on the "war" part which, to me in part, means targeting enemy assets in space, e.g. artificial satellites for communications and other purposes. If it were a race between nations to accomplish a specific goal, then by all means, let the games begin.
- SEJeff 11y agoHow would it be worse if only a very select number of companies / powers are going to space? We won't be going to space to get to the local supermarket, so I am genuinely unsure how your analogy makes any sense.