It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Space Weapons for Earth Wars

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 30 2008 @ 02:23 AM
link   

Space Weapons for Earth Wars


www.space.com

Space Weapons, the Return of Ezekiel and the Restoration of the Ancient World Order?
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.spacedaily.com
blog.wired.com
www.nytimes.com
www.iranian.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
www.abovetopsecret.com...




posted on May, 30 2008 @ 02:23 AM
link   
In the establishments of the ancient world, political power was highly centralized and those who held it were clearly visible and always under threat of death. After the bow and arrow were perfected, however, the post-ancient world began to witness a transformation in the social order--the establishment became, more and more, behind the scenes. After the introduction of gunpowder, pluralistic establishments became the norm. What will happen to "democracy" once space weapons are introduced?

www.space.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 02:37 AM
link   
Many of these weapons have been developed decades ago. Who knows what and how much assets US and Russia has despite the treaty?

I always thought a mass driver on the moon would be a primo weapon to deploy. You can throw as much rock as you want to any unsuspecting nation.



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 05:04 AM
link   
My favourite space weapon is the one that caused the twin towers to collapse by turning steel to dust!

(I like the idea but don't worry I don't actually believe it).



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 09:46 AM
link   
reply to post by redmotion
 


The scariest space weapon I've researched about were FOB Shots (Fractional Orbital Bombardment). It was developed and scarely deployed by the Russians in the early- to mid-60s. Its similar to a Thor Shot or Thunder Rods. The only difference is you put a nuclear warhead on the tip.

During the Cold War, Russia developed FOBs as a first strike weapon. With the threat of nuclear attack, the most direct way for US and Russia to attack was through the North Pole. So most of radar and early warning systems were pointing northward. With FOBs, these objects would come from the south. Russia would be able to nuclear strike US with little or no warning.

The program got scrapped for some reason. And I read somewhere that US got the technology. Same thing happened with Russia's super sonic torpedo (a simple and elegant maritime weapon).

Thor Shots (aka Thunder Rods) are very cool. Simple and very effective.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 09:21 PM
link   
reply to post by guppy
 


The Fractional-Orbit Bombardment System went out of favor for a lot of reasons, none of which are that mysterious. Its one big selling point was that it allowed the delivery of nuclear warheads from "unexpected" directions, vastly complicating early-warning and ABM efforts.

One problem with the system is that it required far more powerful boosters than a simple ballistic trajectory, which meant greater cost, and reduced reliability.

Another problem for FOBS was that it wasn't hard to detect. A mass launch of FOBS delivery vehicles would be near impossible to hide, and would take longer to arrive than a 'conventional' ICBM wave...which could put your country in the unenviable position of firing the first shot, but landing the second punch. If you launched a few at a time and left them in orbit (in which case, it's not technically a *Fractional* orbit system), the constellation of satellites would be a red flag (no pun intended) to NORAD.

Yet another problem was a new technology (at the time) called the "Ballistic Missile Submarine." It had the same advantage that FOBS did (the ability to strike from unexpected directions), and, in fact, did that trick better than FOBS did. The submarines were also harder to locate and track, further complicating the defensive picture. In short, the FOBS suffered the same fate as the Montana-Class battleships. By the time the bugs were worked out, something else came along that did the same job better.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 09:30 PM
link   
I already suspected that crop circles, at least the modern ones, are the results of some form of space weapon.

For crop circles, I'm actually leaning toward space weapon rather than ET explanation.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 09:38 PM
link   
Someone on this board mentioned that harp could be bounced off satellites.I dont know much about that theory.



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 07:24 PM
link   
Pretty sure the "rods from god" idea has been shown to be completely pointless. Getting such a stupidly huge amount of mass into orbit ect. you might as well just use a few cruise missiles. Far cheaper and more reliable.

We need to keep weapons out of space, orbital debris is getting worse and worse and once it's reaches saturation point: No more space travel or global communications for ANYONE for a few hundred years at least.

The whole idea of weapons in space would be more dangerous to the possible advancement of humanity that the dark ages ever were.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 01:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Brother Stormhammer
 


Great points about FOBS. The advent of Boomers changed a lot in military strategy. It also got a lot of people more scared. But FOBS and Thor Shots showed how simple technology could do back in the 60s. Imagine what the US military (NOT NASA) has now. I am a strong believer that NASA is just a smoke screen while the US Air Force is the real space program.

Having a mass driver on the moon, or even on Mars, was always my favorite space weapon. Of course, you can always put the mass driver on the ground. It would ease the process of bringing supplies and materials to orbit. Plus, it can be used as a weapon.




top topics



 
0

log in

join