Slashdot Log In
Chinese Lasers Blind US Satelites
Posted by
kdawson
on Thu Sep 28, 2006 08:10 AM
from the do-not-look-directly-into-laser-beam-with-your-remaining-eye dept.
from the do-not-look-directly-into-laser-beam-with-your-remaining-eye dept.
SniperClops writes, "China has fired high-power lasers at U.S. spy satellites flying over its territory in what experts see as a test of Chinese ability to blind the spacecraft, according to sources." The article mentions the reluctance of the U.S. administration to talk about this "asymmetric" effort by the Chinese military.
Related Stories
[+]
U.S. Announces New Space Security Policy 475 comments
hey! writes "The Bush administration has announced a new space security policy, which includes the statement that 'Consistent with this policy, the United States will preserve its rights, capabilities and freedom of action in space ... and deny, if necessary, adversaries the use of space capabilities hostile to U.S. national interests.'" More from the article: "Eisendrath, co-author of a forthcoming book, 'War in Heaven: Stopping an Arms Race in Outer Space Before It Is Too Late,' says the United States is wasting its time. 'Defense Secretary Rumsfeld says we need to protect against a 'space Pearl Harbor,'' he says. 'But we're still the dominant power there.'"
[+]
Technology: China Tests Anti-Satellite Laser Weapon 552 comments
schnippy writes "U.S. intelligence agencies believe that China has successfully tested an anti-satellite weapon by destroying one of their old weather satellites. The test, if confirmed, would be an order of magnitude more provocative than earlier reports of Chinese blinding lasers being tested. Arms Control Wonk has a good writeup on what this will mean for U.S. policy."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
blind my eyes too (Score:5, Funny)
An interesting difference in article vs blurb (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:blind my eyes too (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
What I really want to know... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What I really want to know... (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:What I really want to know... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:What I really want to know... (Score:5, Insightful)
It surely may sound ironic in the case of China, but : a sovereign nation has a right to privacy.
I'll remember that the next time they try to steal nuclear technology from us.
Parent
How is this interesting? (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course, reading my own definition, this would justify Afghans and Iraqis seeking to expel the Americans and the British, just as it justified the French Resistance in WW2, and the American Colonists in the 1770s.
At what point is the present US administration going to face up the fact that it is the self-appointed global hegemon and that five and a half billion people disagree with that?
Parent
Re:How is this interesting? (Score:5, Insightful)
So does this mean that the US has the right to disable Chinese "fishing" vessels outside the 12 mile limit on the open seas if the "fishing" vessels are covered with anttenae? No, because that would be an act of war or piracy because nations have a right to sail on the open seas, just as nations have a right to have satellites in space. You are justifying a violation of treaties governing the neutrality of space.
Parent
Re:What I really want to know... (Score:5, Informative)
Wikipedia article on the Outer Space Treaty [wikipedia.org]
Parent
Re:What I really want to know... (Score:5, Insightful)
What's the problem with the chinese shining their lasers at space that nobody owns anyway?
Parent
China Is a Potential Trade Partner (Score:5, Informative)
Read the rest of it. It's an interesting article, but some of these statements come off as revenue generating news (and considering this is Defense News, it's no surprise).
They forget to mention that we would probably do the same (if not worse) to deter spy satellites over our own country. They also don't address the concept of whether or not a country has a righ to its own privacy here. I think we would want privacy for our country and should not be surprised or angered to find our attempts thwarted when spying on other countries. Well, that jamming station must not have worked well and I highly doubt it was put there by the Russians. I cannot think of a clear motive for it. Probably sold as surplus or exchanged for payment by a disgruntled soldier and found its way to Iraq.
So we'll either change our standards or give the military a special encrypted standard. The cat and mouse game will begin between the US wanting to see what China's doing and China not wanting the US to see what they're doing. Frankly, I don't really give a damn. China has some bad leaders and some severe problems but they're more internal than anything.
You'll find at the bottom of the article: That's right, they do. So this isn't really news so much as "Country X Defends Itself Against Country Y" except that Country Y is the only country that thinks it's hot shit and that the world must reveal all and revolve around Country Y. Also, our leader has stated that non-compliance means you are with the terrorists and you're against us.
Parent
Re:What I really want to know... (Score:5, Informative)
The Russians operated a multitude of surveillance satellites over the US in the 1960s-1980s. They still do I believe. As do the Chinese. As do, I believe, others. Almost all reconisiance sattelites should be able to "spy" on the US should their owners be so inclined.
If anyone cares enough to try to figure out exactly how many surveillence satellites are in orbit, here's a link to the Union Of Concerned Scientists sattelite database [ucsusa.org]
Parent
Re:What I really want to know... (Score:5, Funny)
I cannot tell if that was really deep, or really dumb.
Finkployd
Parent
Re:What I really want to know... (Score:5, Funny)
A theocracy that needs nukes certainly has a faith problem. (Not to mention that whole witches in ponds handing out swords thing.)
Parent
Re:What I really want to know... (Score:5, Insightful)
I can't say much for North Korea's mindset (maybe they are just their own special brand of insane?) but for the militant islamist countries, they would certainly prefer everyone dead over both they and the "infidels" being alive.
Parent
Re:What I really want to know... (Score:5, Funny)
That's just a side effect of our agenda.
Parent
Re:What I really want to know... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:What I really want to know... (Score:5, Interesting)
The last thing one wants is to have nuclear weapons in the possession of unstable regimes either unable to control the devices or demonstratively irrational. But do either North Korea or Iran really meet those conditions? I personally don't think so. It is also somewhat understandable why these states are intersted in possessing them given the sort of armchair militarism that passes for IR analysis in much Western punditry.
The invasion of Iraq was a huge disaster, if only for destroying the credibility of international organizations like the United Nations as a restraint on the unilateral militarism of its members. The proliferation of nuclear weapons through the Middle East may be the only thing capable of stabilizing the region at this point.
This isn't an easy case to argue either way.
Parent
Temporary blindness (Score:5, Insightful)
From TFA:
So its a bit like saturating a camera with light so it can't take good pictures, but once it moves on it should be OK.
Did you ever (Score:5, Funny)
Did you ever see a friggin' shark in a Google Earth picture? No?
Now you know why.
Um, they can hit the ones they can see... (Score:5, Interesting)
The $500 billion dollar annual defense budget is being spent somewhere. I would hope some of it was put into spy satellites that are awful easy to overlook.
Re:Um, they can hit the ones they can see... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
could this be a bluff? (Score:5, Insightful)
If I was in the US spying game and I know that someone was trying to blind my satellites, I'd say "Oh no, you've stopped me photographing your secret installations" even if the attempts were unsuccessful. That way the target thinks they've stopped the spy satellites, whereas in practice, the lasers may be completely ineffectual.
Until the Chinese spies can get hold of genuine, spoiled, satellite photos (that weren't staged/planted) they cannot be sure they have suceeded.
Re:Eventually... (Score:5, Insightful)
Honestly, did the world just begin for many of you people in 2000? Look I'm no fan of Bush, but it is not like prior to 2000 the Chinese held none of our assets, the Islamic extremists loved us, and the federal government held civil liberties in high regard. You know, EVERYTHING is not Bush's fault.
Finkployd
Parent