TOTAL INFORMATION ANALYSIS

Sunday, December 17, 2006

The PNAC (Project for a New American Century) faction which penetrated the Pentagon was eager for a chance to demonstrate the effectiveness of their space-based and directed-energy weapons. Consider this quote from the very same manuscript, Rebuilding America's Defense, which also called for a "new Pearl Harbor" to kick off inifinite war against the Muslim world:

"The United States must field a global system of missile defenses, [&] divine ways to control the new "international commons" of space .
[...]
The Air Force should use some of its increased budget and the savings from the cancellation of the Joint Strike Fighter program to accelerate the process of transformation within the service, to include developing new space capabilities. The ability to have access to, operate in, and dominate the aerospace environment has
become the key to military success in modern, high-technology warfare.
[...]
While there is an argument to be made for "terminal" ground-based interceptors as an element in a larger architecture of missile defenses, it deserves the lowest rather than the first priority. The first element in any missile defense network should be a galaxy of surveillance satellites with sensors capable of acquiring enemy ballistic missiles immediately upon launch. Once a missile is tracked and targeted, this information needs to be instantly disseminated through a world-wide command-and-control system, including direct links to interceptors. To address the special problems of theater-range ballistic missiles, theater-level defenses should be layered as well. In addition to space-based systems, these theater systems should include both land- and sea-based interceptors, to allow for deployment to trouble spots to reinforce theater systems already in place or to cover gaps where no defenses exist. In addition, they should be "two-tiered," providing close-in "point defense" of valuable targets and forces as well as upper-level, "theater-wide" coverage.
[...]
But to be most effective, this array global reconnaissance and targeting satellites should be linked to a global network of space-based interceptors (or space-based lasers). In fact, it is misleading to think of such a system as a "national" missile defense system, for it would be a vital element in theater defenses, protecting U.S. allies or expeditionary forces abroad from longer-range theater weapons. This is why the Bush Administration's missile defense architecture, which is almost identical to the network described above, was called Global Protection Against Limited Strikes (GPALS).

No system of missile defenses can be fully effective without placing sensors and weapons in space. Although this would appear to be creating a potential new theater of warfare, in fact space has been militarized for the better part of four decades. Weather, communications, navigation and reconnaissance satellites are increasingly essential elements in American military power. Indeed, U.S. armed forces are uniquely dependent upon space. As the 1996 Joint Strategy Review, a precursor to the 1997 Quadrennial Defense Review, concluded, "Space is already inextricably linked to military operations on land, on the sea, and in the air." The report of the National Defense Panel agreed: "Unrestricted use of space has become a major strategic interest of the United States."

In 1996, commecial launches exceeded military launches in the United States, and commercial revenues exceeded government expenditures on space. Today, more than 1,100 commercial companies across more than 50 countries are developing, building, and operating space systems. Many of these commercial space systems have direct military applications, including information from global positioning system constellations . . .

95 percent of current U.S. military communications are carried over commercial circuits... Control of space – defined by Space Command as "the ability to assure access to space, freedom of operations within the space medium, and an ability to deny others the use of space" – must be an essential element of our military strategy. If America cannot maintain that control, its ability to conduct global military operations will be severely complicated, far more costly, and potentially fatally compromised.

The Navy Theater-Wide system is based upon the Aegis system, with an upgraded radar and higher-velocity – though intentionally slowed down to meet administration concerns over violating the ABM Treaty – version of the Standard missile. The THAAD system has enjoyed recent test success, but development of the Navy Theater-Wide system has been hampered by lack of funds. Similarly, a fifth component of a theater-wide network of ballistic missile defenses, the Air Force’s airborne laser project, has suffered from insufficient funding. This system, which mounts a high energy laser in a 747 aircraft, is designed to intercept theater ballistic missiles in their earliest, or "boost" phase, when they are most vulnerable .

[...]
-----

And then, just a month before the "New Pearl Harbor" of 9/11/01, PNAC again reiterated its desire to use these exotic weapons. From a PNAC open memo to "opinion leaders," August 2, 2001:

[...]Space has been militarized for decades and control of space is fundamental to maintaining American military preeminence.

[...]Space is fast becoming the "high seas" of the future, and "space power" the equivalent of the "sea power" that propelled first Great Britain and then the United States on the path to global leadership. Control of the emerging "international commons" of space will do much to determine the future shape of international politics here on earth.

These challenges are well understood by the Defense Department and the Bush Administration more broadly. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld chaired a recent congressionally-mandated commission on the future of spacespace has been militarized for decades and control of space is fundamental to maintaining American military preeminence.
[...]

Labels: directed-energy

| Posted at 12:54 | PERMA-LINK |

Comments:

Post a Comment