United States to launch missile
By lancingboy
@lancingboy (1385)
United States
February 15, 2008 1:55am CST
Okay, this is about the dead satallite in outer space that is supposedly hurling toward the earth. They say that there is a lot of radiation or something like that and it could hurt people.
Well, George Bush said that he approved the launching of a missile into space to destroy it before it came down to earth. What I was thinking after I heard that news report was this. Wouldn't it be a nice little "coincidence" if that missile were to "accidently" hit another country. Does anyone else think this is possible? Did anyone else have the same thoughts when they heard about it?
5 responses
@Smith2028 (797)
• United States
15 Feb 08
No. Actually I find that thought kinda of ridiculous. And here is why
A) We have no missile capable of traveling to any country in which we are currently at war with, or contemplating war with.
B) It would be a crime if President Bush ordered a missile to shoot down a satellite and used it against another country.
@lancingboy (1385)
• United States
19 Feb 08
Thanks for the response. On the first point you made, I'm sure that if the government has the technology to see people's homes through the satellites in space, then they'd have the technology to have missiles that can go far with the help of GPS navigation.
The second thing you brought up with Bush committing a crime if the missile was ordered to launch....well, there are plenty of crimes committed by Bush and his administration.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
19 Feb 08
I can assure you that the US is more than capable of firing a missile at any country it wishes. There are missiles with high tech programs including maps of the territories they are fired at that can function with, or without satellite guidance. The US also has weapons strategically placed throughout the world in the event that a war starts.
There were missiles being fired into Afghanistan less than 8 hours after the 9-11 attacks occurred. I remember watching the footage that night and how the government officially denied that they were attacking Afghanistan, instead claiming the explosions being viewed were actually infighting between the Taliban and Northern alliance. Their excuse was not plausible because neither of those factions had weaponry capable of the explosions being seen on TV.
@MrNiceGuy (4141)
• United States
23 Feb 08
satellite down, no radiation to speak of, no problems, no conspiracy... good job government!
@lancingboy (1385)
• United States
21 Feb 08
I know what you mean there. After reading about all the sabotage, assassinations, ect. the government has done in the past (like the early 1900's or before), I'm surprised people put so much trust into a government. Especially these days when things are much worse and there are tons of corruption within it.
@MrNiceGuy (4141)
• United States
16 Feb 08
If the US wanted to covertly launch a missile and claim it were an accident, there wouldn't need to be a satellite involved...
And where did you hear about a radioactive satellite hurtling towards earth anyways?
@lancingboy (1385)
• United States
19 Feb 08
Hi there. I heard about the radioactive satellite all over the news. It's on every channel that has news broadcasts and there has been a segment about it since last week.
@4ftfingers (1310)
•
15 Feb 08
After joining other nations in condemning China for shooting down an old weather satellite I find this highly hypocritical.
Bush Administration officials said the sole reason for this is 'to avoid a spread of toxic fuel in an inhabited area' and 'it was not using the effort to test its most exotic weapons or send a message to any adversaries'. What a load of rubbish!
The toxic fuel they are talking about is hydrazine and although is dangerous, it's not lethal and not dangerous enough for them to spend all that money to shoot this satellite down. It would be cheaper for them to pay off anyone who is affected by the hydrazine. Besides, the odds of the satellite landing near anywhere inhabited are extremely low anyway.
It is blatantly obvious that the Pentagon is desperate to prove to China their space weapons capabilities are superior, giving no thought for the risks. This sort of one-up-manship is going to lead to a space-arms race which we could all live better without.
@lancingboy (1385)
• United States
19 Feb 08
I agree with the one-up-manship response. It would be terrible if that missile ended up being the reason another war breaks out between America and China. We already have enough on our plate with the Middle East and possibly Russia.
@lancingboy (1385)
• United States
15 Feb 08
lol, and I usually don't get into the whole conspiracy theory stuff. That was the first joke that came out of my mouth though after hearing about it. I told it to my brother because he was in the same room when that segment of the news came on.
You're probably right about the sinister purposes being kept out of the eyes of the public. Okay, I got that part all mixed up but I think you know what I meant hehe.
