5 ms·

Blind nationalism would deter our progress as a species. Ever since NASA chief's comment, the arguments have been very polarised. What NASA said is scientifica

Blind nationalism would deter our progress as a species. Ever since NASA chief's comment, the arguments have been very polarised. What NASA said is scientifically accurate & being one of the major stake holder in ISS it has a duty to tell its opinion. There are people in International Space Station, don't forget that their family on earth would want an answer from NASA for such incidents. The issue in the country seems to be, not what NASA said; but why did it say that! Yes, US has conducted similar tests & its debris went further in apogee as well & since it didn't change orbit[second application of delta-v is required to do that]; it decayed eventually. Same will happen with the debris we caused as there is not much change in perigee. If ASATs renew new arms race across the planet & everyone starts blowing satellites, it's not good for the humanity. If Israel can enforce deterrence as a nuclear power without conducting or acknowledging major nuclear tests, India can project space warfare ready without indulging in such activities; after all there was no doubt about our rocket engineering capabilities to start with. Edit : Typo

yumraj 8y ago
Blind idealism/pacifism will wipe out countries/races/societies. India didn't choose it's neighbors, but it is what it is. On one side is a country whose identity is defined by anti-India-nism. On the other side is China, need I say more. Moreover, both these neighbors are ganged up by their mutual animosity of India. India doesn't have any options but to make sure there are deterrents in place. It's a necessity.
- Abishek_Muthian 8y ago
  >Blind idealism/pacifism will wipe out countries/races/societies. I'm sure Mahatma Gandhi & Co had to listen to such statements as well, glad that they didn't listen; Republic of India might not have been even formed otherwise.
  - yumraj 8y ago
    I'm sorry, I'll have to respectfully but strongly disagree if you're going to simplify India's attainment of Independence and grant entire credit to Gandhi & Co. There were many others who contributed, some more than others, some peacefully some not so. And, let's not forget the WW-2 after which the British were not in a strong enough position to hold on to colonies. Also, you should ask Dalai Lama how the pacifism worked out for the Tibetans when their country was occupied by China. I surely don't want that for any country, and definitely not for India.
  - sbmthakur 8y ago
    Mahatama wasn't an idealist. He supported Britain's pro-peace war and didn't shy away from supporting violence in certain cases. "It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of nonviolence to cover impotence." - Mahatma Gandhi Rest assured, Republic of India would've formed one way or the other.
    - CamperBob2 8y ago
      This is the same Gandhi who advocated passive resistance in the face of the Holocaust?
      - sbmthakur 8y ago
        Unfortunately, yes.
- guitarbill 8y ago
  > On one side is a country whose identity is defined by anti-India-nism. On the other side is China, need I say more Two incredibly low blows, although I suppose this way you've made your isolated point of view very clear. > Moreover, both these neighbors are ganged up by their mutual animosity of India. Another way of saying this is they've been successful in maintaining strong ties via diplomacy and trade, to the benefit of their peoples. > India doesn't have any options but to make sure there are deterrents in place. It's a necessity. There have always been options; some of which India has rejected themselves, arguably leading to the souring of other international relations. This weapons test will hopefully lead to condemnations and repercussions, direct or indirect. For example, I would welcome the IRSO being excluded from further policy-making as part of the Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee (IADC).
  - BurningFrog 8y ago
    Calling China "China" is an incredibly low blow?
    - glennpratt 8y ago
      You ignored the rest of the sentence.
  - vlehto 8y ago
    >Another way of saying this is they've been successful in maintaining strong ties via diplomacy and trade, to the benefit of their peoples. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China–Pakistan_relations#Military_relations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China–Pakistan_relations#Milit...
  - sbmthakur 8y ago
    > Another way of saying this is they've been successful in maintaining strong ties via diplomacy and trade, to the benefit of their peoples. How is it strong trade ties when one country owes billions of dollars to other? https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/pakistan-owe-china-gwadar-port-usd-10-billion-debt-1479562-2019-03-16 https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/pakistan-owe-china-gwa...
- idlewords 8y ago
  The Himalayas are a pretty convenient deterrent already.
  - vlehto 8y ago
    China could attack India via Myanmar. They already have military bases and naval bases there. Pakistan does not have even puppet state as hindrance.
    - idlewords 8y ago
      That invasion route also involves crossing half the mountains in Asia. India and China are where they are for a reason!
      - vlehto 8y ago
        Another way of looking at the matter is that the invasion route also involves fighting off Indian Defense forces. Independent countries have military for a reason.
        idlewords 8y ago
        Mountains, army, food hard to eat with chopsticks—there are so many good reasons for China to continue its five-thousand-year-long streak of not attempting an invasion of the Indian subcontinent.
        vlehto 8y ago
        56 year streak to be accurate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_War
  - jen729w 8y ago
    My standard recommendation when the conversation reaches this point is Tim Marshall’s book: https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Prisoners-of-Geography/Tim-Marshall/9781501121470 https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Prisoners-of-Geograph...
glax 8y ago
Acting US Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan earlier played down the threat the debris might pose to satellites in space and said it was his understanding the debris would eventually burn up in the atmosphere. Asked on Thursday whether the Pentagon stood by Shanahan's earlier assessment, spokesman Charlie Summers said: "Yes." So it whose wordings are correct ? Pentagon or NASA ? The ASAT test was specifically conducted at the orbit of 380Km less than the maximum range of 100Kms because the residues will gradually decompose within weeks and there will be almost none interference to existing or upcoming orbital paths. The Micro satellite was specifically chosen for this purpose. There is no reason for Nationalism in this.
- craftyguy 8y ago
  > Acting US Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan Why would a former Beoing executive, who has had nothing to do with Beoing's space-related ventures in his 30 years there, know anything about orbital mechanics? > the Pentagon stood by Shanahan's earlier assessment Why would anyone at the pentagon who wanted to keep their job/position publicly release a conflict with a statement from their upper management?
- Abishek_Muthian 8y ago
  US DOD was informed prior ASAT test & their non objection stems in we being their strategic partner. It doesn't mean the number of debris in higher apogee or the their probability to cause harm is false(how ever low the probability might be). Anyone can verify the same, if they have the means. NASA is answerable to public & that they did. Just like our ISRO is. I see many, including media confusing between ISRO & DRDO in this context. DRDO was the one which conducted the ASAT test, even if ISRO was involved somehow it shouldn't be advertised; just like how NASA's involvement in any US defence related activity is contained. The term 'peaceful space exploration' exists for a reason.
qbaqbaqba 8y ago
> Blind nationalism would deter our progress as a species. Blind nationalism has fueled our progress as a species.

yumraj 8y ago

Blind idealism/pacifism will wipe out countries/races/societies. India didn't choose it's neighbors, but it is what it is. On one side is a country whose identity is defined by anti-India-nism. On the other side is China, need I say more. Moreover, both these neighbors are ganged up by their mutual animosity of India. India doesn't have any options but to make sure there are deterrents in place. It's a necessity.

Abishek_Muthian 8y ago
>Blind idealism/pacifism will wipe out countries/races/societies. I'm sure Mahatma Gandhi & Co had to listen to such statements as well, glad that they didn't listen; Republic of India might not have been even formed otherwise.
- yumraj 8y ago
  I'm sorry, I'll have to respectfully but strongly disagree if you're going to simplify India's attainment of Independence and grant entire credit to Gandhi & Co. There were many others who contributed, some more than others, some peacefully some not so. And, let's not forget the WW-2 after which the British were not in a strong enough position to hold on to colonies. Also, you should ask Dalai Lama how the pacifism worked out for the Tibetans when their country was occupied by China. I surely don't want that for any country, and definitely not for India.
- sbmthakur 8y ago
  Mahatama wasn't an idealist. He supported Britain's pro-peace war and didn't shy away from supporting violence in certain cases. "It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of nonviolence to cover impotence." - Mahatma Gandhi Rest assured, Republic of India would've formed one way or the other.
  - CamperBob2 8y ago
    This is the same Gandhi who advocated passive resistance in the face of the Holocaust?
    - sbmthakur 8y ago
      Unfortunately, yes.
guitarbill 8y ago
> On one side is a country whose identity is defined by anti-India-nism. On the other side is China, need I say more Two incredibly low blows, although I suppose this way you've made your isolated point of view very clear. > Moreover, both these neighbors are ganged up by their mutual animosity of India. Another way of saying this is they've been successful in maintaining strong ties via diplomacy and trade, to the benefit of their peoples. > India doesn't have any options but to make sure there are deterrents in place. It's a necessity. There have always been options; some of which India has rejected themselves, arguably leading to the souring of other international relations. This weapons test will hopefully lead to condemnations and repercussions, direct or indirect. For example, I would welcome the IRSO being excluded from further policy-making as part of the Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee (IADC).
- BurningFrog 8y ago
  Calling China "China" is an incredibly low blow?
  - glennpratt 8y ago
    You ignored the rest of the sentence.
- vlehto 8y ago
  >Another way of saying this is they've been successful in maintaining strong ties via diplomacy and trade, to the benefit of their peoples. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China–Pakistan_relations#Military_relations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China–Pakistan_relations#Milit...
- sbmthakur 8y ago
  > Another way of saying this is they've been successful in maintaining strong ties via diplomacy and trade, to the benefit of their peoples. How is it strong trade ties when one country owes billions of dollars to other? https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/pakistan-owe-china-gwadar-port-usd-10-billion-debt-1479562-2019-03-16 https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/pakistan-owe-china-gwa...
idlewords 8y ago
The Himalayas are a pretty convenient deterrent already.
- vlehto 8y ago
  China could attack India via Myanmar. They already have military bases and naval bases there. Pakistan does not have even puppet state as hindrance.
  - idlewords 8y ago
    That invasion route also involves crossing half the mountains in Asia. India and China are where they are for a reason!
    - vlehto 8y ago
      Another way of looking at the matter is that the invasion route also involves fighting off Indian Defense forces. Independent countries have military for a reason.
      - idlewords 8y ago
        Mountains, army, food hard to eat with chopsticks—there are so many good reasons for China to continue its five-thousand-year-long streak of not attempting an invasion of the Indian subcontinent.
        vlehto 8y ago
        56 year streak to be accurate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_War
- jen729w 8y ago
  My standard recommendation when the conversation reaches this point is Tim Marshall’s book: https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Prisoners-of-Geography/Tim-Marshall/9781501121470 https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Prisoners-of-Geograph...

glax 8y ago

Acting US Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan earlier played down the threat the debris might pose to satellites in space and said it was his understanding the debris would eventually burn up in the atmosphere. Asked on Thursday whether the Pentagon stood by Shanahan's earlier assessment, spokesman Charlie Summers said: "Yes." So it whose wordings are correct ? Pentagon or NASA ? The ASAT test was specifically conducted at the orbit of 380Km less than the maximum range of 100Kms because the residues will gradually decompose within weeks and there will be almost none interference to existing or upcoming orbital paths. The Micro satellite was specifically chosen for this purpose. There is no reason for Nationalism in this.

craftyguy 8y ago
> Acting US Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan Why would a former Beoing executive, who has had nothing to do with Beoing's space-related ventures in his 30 years there, know anything about orbital mechanics? > the Pentagon stood by Shanahan's earlier assessment Why would anyone at the pentagon who wanted to keep their job/position publicly release a conflict with a statement from their upper management?
Abishek_Muthian 8y ago
US DOD was informed prior ASAT test & their non objection stems in we being their strategic partner. It doesn't mean the number of debris in higher apogee or the their probability to cause harm is false(how ever low the probability might be). Anyone can verify the same, if they have the means. NASA is answerable to public & that they did. Just like our ISRO is. I see many, including media confusing between ISRO & DRDO in this context. DRDO was the one which conducted the ASAT test, even if ISRO was involved somehow it shouldn't be advertised; just like how NASA's involvement in any US defence related activity is contained. The term 'peaceful space exploration' exists for a reason.

qbaqbaqba 8y ago

> Blind nationalism would deter our progress as a species. Blind nationalism has fueled our progress as a species.