Re: Re: Re: starship-design: build it now...

[Paul Anderson <madhobby@geeky1.ebtech.net>]

On Wed, 14 Apr 1999 KellySt@aol.com wrote:

> 
> Actually the logic kinda scares me the more I think about it.  Don't built 
> the space craft because it could be misused. 
>
What people must realise is that no one can stop science.  When it is time
for something to be invented, no one can stop it's invention.  Also, you
can never keep someone from developing a technology that you already have.
Consider the situation of, oh, Albania - say they wanted to build a
nuclear weapon.  Even if they couldn't hire an accomplished physicist, and
obtain the documentation that was churned out when this stuff was being
first pioneered, they could still build one.  It's simply a matter of time
and money.  When you think about it, when guys like Oppenheimer started
building the a-bomb, they didn't have the documentation.  They didn't know
how to build a nuke, but they figured it out for themselves.  What makes
them so special that they would be the only people on the planet that
could come up with this?

IMHO, I don't think that LEO-capable missiles are all that important,
anyways.  They're complex, difficult to guide, hard to build, and a
nuisance to launch.  How many missiles has NATO used against the Serbs
that went up 60km, waited a half-hour then dropped back down on the
enemy's head?  Why do that, with the difficulties of aiming, when you can
just fly in a high-speed jet, and very quickly drop a bomb on your target.
When you think about it, what tactical use would such a device have?  On
it's way down, if the enemy has jets(who doesn't these days?), they would
have plenty of time to shoot the sucker down.  I admit I'm not an expert
in military tactics, so explain to me how a missile capable of LEO would
be more useful, cheaper and more effective than just flying in a jet, and
dropping a bomb?

---
Paul Anderson
madhobby@geeky1.ebtech.net
"We have learned to imitute you exarctly."