> I have some familiarity with some of the problems they need to solve... The only real fully existential physical threats to the US will come not from sea, air

> I have some familiarity with some of the problems they need to solve... The only real fully existential physical threats to the US will come not from sea, air, or land, cyber, or biology ... but from space. I have some familiars with the problems a "cyber force" may need to solve and I believe that neither land, water, air, nor space will be the threats but instead cyber threats. > Because of the physical distances and latencies in space, the only thing that secures those vehicles from each other (and therefore any commerce and national interest in space) is cybersecurity. Ah we are in agreement after all. But actually I think this is a case of familiarity bias. I agree we need the space force, and we need to defend the perimeter, but I think there's some truth that each war is unique, so we won't fight in space the way we had to fight air or sea. We need to defend in space the way we had to defend in air and sea though. No one in war would retry a losing technique, and if it was a winning technique everyone else had a chance to study it before the next battle, so you better find another winning technique. We still have a lot of new things to try in cyber warfare and a lot of history for "IRL" war actions.