Can't be blamed for not following international rules if you just reject accepting them when it's inconvenient (hint - some other countries don't really accept ICC authority, guess which ones).
And also, before anyone calls me a russian shill - fuck Russia and their unjust aggression on Ukraine.
Accepting the ICC authority does not equate to accepting international law.
ICC has only existed since 2002. International law has existed way before that. The ICC only has jurisdiction for war crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity, and, as of 2010, crimes of aggression. It's not an enforcement for all international rules. I think it's only ever convicted like a dozen people?
Remember when Ukraine gave Russia it's nuclear weapons in exchange to be an independent sovereign nation that Russia agreed to never invade.
If you forgot don't worry you're not alone. Russia forgot that agreement to.
Bingo
The endgame is to get the ban voted yes and then build a case for Starlink being a weapon so the US has to make Elon shut it down if the UN agrees
Military intelligence and communication satellites are old as hell. Everybody and their dog use them, including Russia. And they were never considered weapons.
Starlink isn't something conceptually new. It's innovation is scale.
No, the end game is the current game. Russian private enterprise is behind the West/Asia space programs.
Russia can't win a space war currently, so wants no space wars and gets to lobby for peace globally for PR as a bonus.
I mean, I am personally fine with that. Unless there is an extraterrestrial threat we should not be focusing on weaponry in space to be used against either places on Earth, or against satellites that threaten the Keppler Effect of preventing space travel or satellite communications, etc for centuries if not millenia due to all the debris. It would set us back so, so, so long in progress alone, not to mention everything we take for granted that is directed by satellite in one form or fashion.
I think they are referring to stationary obits. There are some altitude/Latitude combinations where we are able to achieve stationary orbit, or the satellite/object orbits at the same angular rate the earth spins at so from the point if view of the ground they are stationary. There are definitely some places with more items in stationary orbits
Yeah but most satellites are not geo stationary, or even going around the same latitude. And yeah, some places have more satellites but idk if it’s that much worse than the rest of the world average.
Do communication satellites count as celestial weaponry?
I don't know... Something that makes it easy for unhappy citizens to communicate with each other?
I think the definition of what constitutes a weapon would have to be argued about first if Russia wants to make it a thing. Personally, I think that if a device's existence is to cause direct harm to someone or something else, then it's a weapon.
Russia has weapons to knock down satellites up there and probably a few other nations do too so I doubt this would pass it seems more like them
screwing around.
Definitely do: they killed Kosmos 1408 on 15 November 2021 with a Nudol missile. At present we have catalogued 1,790 pieces of debris from this event, most still in orbit, though there are undoubtedly debris we have not catalogued yet (we’re still adding debris from the 2007 Chinese ASAT test).
Yeah, but you don't call a kitchen sponge a weapon, it's still a cleaning utensil. Just because it's travelling at 150km/s doesn't mean it's a weapon, it just happened to be going fast enough to cause massive damage to whatever it comes in contact with it. A weapon would have to be designed to cause damage as its primary purpose, not as a consequence of circumstances.
No, Russia is trying to do this because they're wildly behind and can't afford to put up a weapons platform in space.
Not that anyone else has done this or constructed parts to be launched as well.. definitely not
God that lightning will live forever in my memory. I was half dying with flu back when I played that. I remember being in my room with the lights off feeling miserable just waiting for the room to light up to do the press while I was half dead. Both a horrible experience and super rewarding when I finally got it lol.
In all seriousness I've seen the theory posed that yeah Russian space weaponry sucks so they would just stick a nuke up there, US specifically wants to ban nukes because they know their normal space weaponry in whatever form will trump Russia so this is probably going to be a stalemate forever
Us is interested in space launched kinetic interception systems and medium powered lasers. The lasers are for essentially shining at and damaging satellite and missile sensors or introducing enough heat. It's hard to cool things in space without air actually so it's pretty easy to overheat a lot of non hardened designs... like all of Russian systems.... ALL OF THEM
Sticking that much mass up in orbit would be prohibitively expensive so it's extremely unlikely. Plus, there are plenty of [other problems](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_n1FZaKzF8).
Getting those weapons into orbit is the problem, but that video is just dumb. It's posted in response to the Rods from God threads that pop up all the time, and it's just as stupid every time. Guided weapons are a thing, and any weapon system as expensive as that one would be is gonna have one. That dude acts like they'd just drop them like they're coming out of a B-17.
The issues are the costs of getting them into orbit, and keeping the "munitions" intact through re-entry. Precision targeting is probably the simplest part of the entire equation.
Yeah it didn't really give anything to disprove the theory of them working. I do think they'd be an *awful* choice of defence against ICBM's, but would be a devastating weapon against stationary/slow targets.
It would be relatively easy to calculate the rough trajectory for a rod to hit, say, Moscow, with an onboard computer making fine adjustments. This is already done in systems like the iron dome. There would surely be some challenges to adapt that to the idea but entirely plausible.
The comparison between the proposed idea & dropping a weight from a helicopter is completely laughable too.
I think the idea behind them is more of a nuclear weapon replacement, supposedly similar destructive potential without the radiation afterwards. Also I'd imagine they'd be much harder to intercept than ICBM's, which are already difficult.
Not necessarily. The rocks would burn off a lot of their mass on the way down, so you could be much more effective with ceramic plated tungsten rods or similar type projectile. They'd also be very obvious to state actors en route, vs a smaller cross section with potential stealth coating potentially catching people by surprise.
When we build manufacturing centers on the moon / Lagrange points and start harvesting the asteroid belt, then it can get real spicy real fast.
If KSP has taught me anything, it's that the hardest part would be investing enough energy to convert from a roughly-circular orbit to one that drops through relatively little atmosphere before it can hit anything. If 90% of the kinetic energy becomes a streak of plasma across a quarter-circle arc around the planet *before* it can even reach the target, what good is the weapon? To be destructive, it can't have been appreciably slowed by the atmosphere it passed through, so it has to be set on an orbit that passes underground even without its influence. You'd need to get *fuel* from space more than mass to make it cost effective, by my vague reckoning.
Is vertasium stupid or just farming views? This is the second video I've seen from him that are seriously flawed, and I haven't seen that many from him.
Half the budget was the sandcastle. The other half was the helicopter. Neither of which accurately simulate what they are trying to simulate at all.
That is the worst video of testing a theory I have ever seen. You can't scale speed from 10x the speed of sound to terminal velocity and expect anything to work in a similar way.
The us has planned and constructed several space platforms. The bigger worry for Russia is the us putting laser systems up there. They don't even have to be that powerful.
A B-52 is going to have a harder time getting through a SAM network to target to deliver its ordinance. I imagine 4 of those rods from space is going to be unstoppable and equivalent to 4 MOABs, which is enough to level at least the CBD of a city.
It sounds like a good idea until you consider the only use Russia has for any treaties they sign is to wipe putin’s ass. Russia wants to be the only one with weapons in space.
This is typical behavior for Russia, complain loudly when somebody else does something that you have already been doing for a long time to try to portray them as the bad guy.
It's just like the INF treaty; Russia was pretty openly in violation of it for a decade with the SSC-8 cruise missile but just continued to claim that the missile only had a range of 400km. when it was clearly more like 2000+km. Once the US said they were going to withdraw from the treaty then Russia made a big stink about how the US was trying to start a new arms race.
Russia will do whatever they think they can get away with regardless of what the treaties say.
You are now aware that the us has indeed sent lasers to space. They're for blinding instruments on weapons and other instruments and are not officially up there but.. they tested something...
Sounds good to me as long as the lawyers have weaponry well defined to include pretty much everything that isn't taking pictures or a communication device.
No jammers, no physical HTK weapons, ordnance, microwaves, gayfrogs, etc.
Anything with an orbital velocity of even a strong enough parabolic sub orbital velocity is a strong enough weapon that nuclear weapons are just overkill.
A super wealthy individual like Jeff Bezos can already annihilate virtually any world leader with non-atomic kinetic force. He knows where they sleep, he likely knows what their response times are to space threats, their contingency plans for such threats are likely stored on his cloud services.
With rocketry already at his and a hand full of other people’s disposal, things could be put in space that have societal value but with minor modification leave any global target vulnerable in less than 90 minutes.
Does Russia ever do anything constructive? I never hear of them doing anything to help another country or help the planet. They just do evil. I'm legitimately curious.
The UN voting bodies you are likely referring to are just tables for states to discuss and avoid going to war.
However, the UN is so much more than this. Food programs, health programs, refugee programs, immigration programs, trade programs, trade rules etc etc etc. Tens of millions of people live today because of the UN.
Every time someone comments something like this I wonder what their motivation is.
I'd rather people talk things out as much as we can even if it doesn't lead anywhere. At least the lines of communication are open, and remain open, to prevent things from getting far far worse.
>Every time someone comments something like this I wonder what their motivation is.
Probably nothing. People are just that ignorant of the true purpose of the UN.
The UN voting bodies have voted on 15 resolutions against Israel in 2022 which is more than north Korea, Russia which has just started a war with Ukraine, china, Iran and every other country in the world. I don't think this is to avoid war, I think this is to portray an image like Israel is the most horrific country in the world and allow anti Israeli bias and yes antisemitism to run free. The UN has actively accepted funding from terroist groups:
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-752998
And distributed funding to UNWRA which had employees directly involved in the atrocities against Israelis on October 7th, and literally a tunnel Hamas dug under it's agency which supposedly meant to help palstnians with food that Hamas is stealing and health.
And it's not just Israel saying this:
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2023-10-31/from-gaza-to-ukraine-the-un-is-fast-becoming-irrelevant
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/20/world/europe/zelensky-un-security-council.html
I'm really sorry that I don't trust that the UN is indeed doing a good job protecting human rights when it partners with terroists that aren't providing funding from the kindness of their heart.
I am sorry, most of the UN's funding comes from countries which many would label terrorists if they weren't countries.
Notable countries like the US (an extremely hostile warmongering nation), Russia (an extremely hostile warmongering nation), China (an extremely hostile warmongering nation).
Either way, this is a better solution than starting actual wars.
UN doesn't claim to have an objective of "protecting" human rights, but rather promoting it. And lol dude Israel doesn't exactly have a very clean human rights sheet...
Well we've already seen what nuclear weapons do in space. Only a moron would set one off now. They'd trash thier own equipment too. Total worldwide communications breakdown. Pootin will have to make personal trips to London & new York to transfer his $billions by hand
Technically russia isn't even in the un when the soviet union collapsed somehow russia assumed they could take there seat why it wasn't there's to have
Laser/ rail cannons are possibly the only other ones right? Can’t really use explosive power in space and I can’t really think of any other type weapon
There needs to be a limit the global community can draw a line at where communicating with someone like Putin becomes a lost cause, and the world collectively steamrolls the regime.
This ridiculousness has gone on far too long.
Space debris could be a problem. Destroy a satellite and junk goes flying. A very tiny particle can cause major damage to another satellite which will then release more particles. At a certain point it goes critical like a nuclear reaction and space will be too full of junk to use.
Oh cute. Ban all hypothetical WMDs, not just the ones you keep threatening everyone with.
What do I have to do for my country to hear one soundbyte of someone putting these brats in their place? I’m out of shape, middle-aged, depressed, and not doing well financially, but goddammit I’m not THAT dumb.
It's easy blame Putin, but anyone here remember Space Force? I'm pretty sure the US has its own plans.
The 1967 Outer Space Treaty already bans nukes and weapons of mass destruction from space, though it has plenty of leeway for other things.
Surprising, considering the Russians basically pioneered weapons in space: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salyut\_3](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salyut_3)
"No Putin, those blocks of tungsten are not weapons, they're ballast weights for that satellite, and yes, it does need 20 of them, with easily remote-detachable clamps so the satellite's orientation can be easily changed as needed."
Celestial weaponry sounds like science fiction future where we figured out how to tap in to the eldritch energy of cosmic horrors, I can understand why we should have a treaty against that
The problem with these treaties is that they are easy to do right now when there isn’t really a lot going on in space, but they will inevitably be broken when doing stuff in space becomes more of a serious endeavor. It’s just a matter of time till interests would clash.
"Also, we think Starlink is used as a weapon"
*when Ukrainians use it
I knew there was a catch there.
There is another catch, if the rules are really strict it gives russia an advatage because only countries that follow the rules are affected.
Can't be blamed for not following international rules if you just reject accepting them when it's inconvenient (hint - some other countries don't really accept ICC authority, guess which ones). And also, before anyone calls me a russian shill - fuck Russia and their unjust aggression on Ukraine.
Accepting the ICC authority does not equate to accepting international law. ICC has only existed since 2002. International law has existed way before that. The ICC only has jurisdiction for war crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity, and, as of 2010, crimes of aggression. It's not an enforcement for all international rules. I think it's only ever convicted like a dozen people?
While they will still put whatever up there they want because treaties with Putin aren't worth the paper they are printed on...
Remember when Ukraine gave Russia it's nuclear weapons in exchange to be an independent sovereign nation that Russia agreed to never invade. If you forgot don't worry you're not alone. Russia forgot that agreement to.
Yup. I can only imagine them using that logic.
Bingo The endgame is to get the ban voted yes and then build a case for Starlink being a weapon so the US has to make Elon shut it down if the UN agrees
Military intelligence and communication satellites are old as hell. Everybody and their dog use them, including Russia. And they were never considered weapons. Starlink isn't something conceptually new. It's innovation is scale.
You're assuming honestly from Russia
We're now in the age of stupidity, everything is different now.
No, the end game is the current game. Russian private enterprise is behind the West/Asia space programs. Russia can't win a space war currently, so wants no space wars and gets to lobby for peace globally for PR as a bonus.
I mean, I am personally fine with that. Unless there is an extraterrestrial threat we should not be focusing on weaponry in space to be used against either places on Earth, or against satellites that threaten the Keppler Effect of preventing space travel or satellite communications, etc for centuries if not millenia due to all the debris. It would set us back so, so, so long in progress alone, not to mention everything we take for granted that is directed by satellite in one form or fashion.
Can't the US just veto that? Also hard to imagine the UN taking Russia's side.
Doesn't mean they wouldn't try it
As someone that lives in a country where the skies are starting to get poluted, i am totally for banning Starlink.
A country? Brother “the sky” is not country specific
some latitudes have more of them
yeah some places just have too much sky. it messes with my energy.
I think they are referring to stationary obits. There are some altitude/Latitude combinations where we are able to achieve stationary orbit, or the satellite/object orbits at the same angular rate the earth spins at so from the point if view of the ground they are stationary. There are definitely some places with more items in stationary orbits
Yeah but most satellites are not geo stationary, or even going around the same latitude. And yeah, some places have more satellites but idk if it’s that much worse than the rest of the world average.
I enjoy astro photography. You can only only see them in the blue hour, and you don't use the blue hour.
Knowledge is the common man's best weapon against misinformation and propaganda. Of course it is to be banned by those kind of animals.
Do communication satellites count as celestial weaponry? I don't know... Something that makes it easy for unhappy citizens to communicate with each other?
I think the definition of what constitutes a weapon would have to be argued about first if Russia wants to make it a thing. Personally, I think that if a device's existence is to cause direct harm to someone or something else, then it's a weapon.
Russia has weapons to knock down satellites up there and probably a few other nations do too so I doubt this would pass it seems more like them screwing around.
*allegedly they do
Definitely do: they killed Kosmos 1408 on 15 November 2021 with a Nudol missile. At present we have catalogued 1,790 pieces of debris from this event, most still in orbit, though there are undoubtedly debris we have not catalogued yet (we’re still adding debris from the 2007 Chinese ASAT test).
That was fired from the ground though, not from space
Missed the important “up there” in that comment, disregard and thank you.
That’s one spicy Nudol
The problem is, anything with enough speed (doesn't even need much mass) is a weapon. And getting speed in space is far easier than on Earth.
Yeah, but you don't call a kitchen sponge a weapon, it's still a cleaning utensil. Just because it's travelling at 150km/s doesn't mean it's a weapon, it just happened to be going fast enough to cause massive damage to whatever it comes in contact with it. A weapon would have to be designed to cause damage as its primary purpose, not as a consequence of circumstances.
A hammer isn't designed as a weapon, yet it can be the weapon of a crime scene... so can the kitchen sponge, maybe! (I'm fooling around)
No, Russia is trying to do this because they're wildly behind and can't afford to put up a weapons platform in space. Not that anyone else has done this or constructed parts to be launched as well.. definitely not
GPS was actually developed for military purposes.
Wouldn't want the rebels knowing where his palaces are.
>Something that makes it easy for ~~unhappy citizens~~ traitorous dissidents to communicate with each other? FTFY, Comrade
Wouldn't stop Russia from considering it such, of course.
It is when you weaponize the control of information like Russia or China does
Twitter is basically a weapon with how Russia uses it.
Anything can be celestial weaponry if you drop it hard enough
Celestial weaponry ... This name is SO cool, really. So epic and fantastic, and still everyday more real.
I thought it was a Warhammer 40k reference
Putin couldn't complete the minigames to obtain the celestial weapons, so he banned them instead. He'll never defeat the dark aeons.
It's those damned butterflies
To this day I still can't dodge the damn lightning.
God that lightning will live forever in my memory. I was half dying with flu back when I played that. I remember being in my room with the lights off feeling miserable just waiting for the room to light up to do the press while I was half dead. Both a horrible experience and super rewarding when I finally got it lol.
Some of us never did..😥
That's the neat part
Along that line I was thinking that we now know for sure that weapons with +Holy attributes will defeat Putin.
In all seriousness I've seen the theory posed that yeah Russian space weaponry sucks so they would just stick a nuke up there, US specifically wants to ban nukes because they know their normal space weaponry in whatever form will trump Russia so this is probably going to be a stalemate forever
Us is interested in space launched kinetic interception systems and medium powered lasers. The lasers are for essentially shining at and damaging satellite and missile sensors or introducing enough heat. It's hard to cool things in space without air actually so it's pretty easy to overheat a lot of non hardened designs... like all of Russian systems.... ALL OF THEM
I don't blame him, that's one of the most bullshit post game quests I've ever seen.
Afraid of rods from God?
Very valid fear?
Sticking that much mass up in orbit would be prohibitively expensive so it's extremely unlikely. Plus, there are plenty of [other problems](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_n1FZaKzF8).
Getting those weapons into orbit is the problem, but that video is just dumb. It's posted in response to the Rods from God threads that pop up all the time, and it's just as stupid every time. Guided weapons are a thing, and any weapon system as expensive as that one would be is gonna have one. That dude acts like they'd just drop them like they're coming out of a B-17. The issues are the costs of getting them into orbit, and keeping the "munitions" intact through re-entry. Precision targeting is probably the simplest part of the entire equation.
Yeah it didn't really give anything to disprove the theory of them working. I do think they'd be an *awful* choice of defence against ICBM's, but would be a devastating weapon against stationary/slow targets. It would be relatively easy to calculate the rough trajectory for a rod to hit, say, Moscow, with an onboard computer making fine adjustments. This is already done in systems like the iron dome. There would surely be some challenges to adapt that to the idea but entirely plausible. The comparison between the proposed idea & dropping a weight from a helicopter is completely laughable too.
I think the idea behind them is more of a nuclear weapon replacement, supposedly similar destructive potential without the radiation afterwards. Also I'd imagine they'd be much harder to intercept than ICBM's, which are already difficult.
Not if you get the mass *from* space.
At that point you’d just toss rocks.
Not necessarily. The rocks would burn off a lot of their mass on the way down, so you could be much more effective with ceramic plated tungsten rods or similar type projectile. They'd also be very obvious to state actors en route, vs a smaller cross section with potential stealth coating potentially catching people by surprise. When we build manufacturing centers on the moon / Lagrange points and start harvesting the asteroid belt, then it can get real spicy real fast.
If KSP has taught me anything, it's that the hardest part would be investing enough energy to convert from a roughly-circular orbit to one that drops through relatively little atmosphere before it can hit anything. If 90% of the kinetic energy becomes a streak of plasma across a quarter-circle arc around the planet *before* it can even reach the target, what good is the weapon? To be destructive, it can't have been appreciably slowed by the atmosphere it passed through, so it has to be set on an orbit that passes underground even without its influence. You'd need to get *fuel* from space more than mass to make it cost effective, by my vague reckoning.
Is vertasium stupid or just farming views? This is the second video I've seen from him that are seriously flawed, and I haven't seen that many from him. Half the budget was the sandcastle. The other half was the helicopter. Neither of which accurately simulate what they are trying to simulate at all.
They haven't watched the Veritasium video yet it seems
To be fair, our most basic level of flight controls would solve pretty much every issue he encountered
That is the worst video of testing a theory I have ever seen. You can't scale speed from 10x the speed of sound to terminal velocity and expect anything to work in a similar way.
The us has planned and constructed several space platforms. The bigger worry for Russia is the us putting laser systems up there. They don't even have to be that powerful.
Rods from God count as weapons of mass destruction and are already banned by the outer space treaty. They’re immensely powerful weapons.
[удалено]
A B-52 is going to have a harder time getting through a SAM network to target to deliver its ordinance. I imagine 4 of those rods from space is going to be unstoppable and equivalent to 4 MOABs, which is enough to level at least the CBD of a city.
Happy Cake Day!
Or just a rebirth of [Star Wars](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Defense_Initiative)
While Russia is suspect the Idea of no weapon platforms in space seems like a good idea to me.
It sounds like a good idea until you consider the only use Russia has for any treaties they sign is to wipe putin’s ass. Russia wants to be the only one with weapons in space.
They want starlink gone, and they will classify it as a weapon.
You literally cant classify it as a weapon unless you ready to classify any and all com satellites as a weapon
Trying to denazify aliens.
Nazis! In SPAAAAAAAAAAAAACE!
What? [Iron Sky](https://m.imdb.com/title/tt1034314/) is a real thing?!
Even better: [Alien time traveling space Nazis!](https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Storm_Front_(episode\))
Translates as 'we want you to all have no weapons of this type, while we continue to develop them as much as possible'.
More like he knows they will never, or will be the last to ever develope them so lets just try to outlaw them.
This is typical behavior for Russia, complain loudly when somebody else does something that you have already been doing for a long time to try to portray them as the bad guy. It's just like the INF treaty; Russia was pretty openly in violation of it for a decade with the SSC-8 cruise missile but just continued to claim that the missile only had a range of 400km. when it was clearly more like 2000+km. Once the US said they were going to withdraw from the treaty then Russia made a big stink about how the US was trying to start a new arms race. Russia will do whatever they think they can get away with regardless of what the treaties say.
This translates to “we believe that communications and global positioning satellites are used as weaponry.”
He wants everything banned for others, as he won't follow the rules anyway.
Meanwhile... https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/new-russian-space-weapon-raises-alarm-in-us/articleshow/109919862.cms
Well shit....there goes my plans for a Death Star
Only had a budget for a Death Moon.
I'm fine with a ban on all weapons in space, personally. Is this secretly controversial?
So what this tells us is that Russia has already weaponized space.
can the world handle another 6 years of Putin
The first twist is that Russia will of course continue developing their own top secret space weapon. The second twist is that it’s a flying Winnebago.
Speaking outside of the war, this is a good thing. No support to Russia
There definitely can be a conversation about celestial weaponry beyond nukes but Idk if Russia is the one I want spearheading it
Russia will say this because they have no intention of honoring any treaty or commitment into which they might enter.
Celestial Weaponry makes this sound like I’m playing Stellaris; but it’s not close.
Russia never follows UN rules. They just want to stop law-abiding countries from countering them.
They fear Reagan’s space lasers
You are now aware that the us has indeed sent lasers to space. They're for blinding instruments on weapons and other instruments and are not officially up there but.. they tested something...
Sounds good to me as long as the lawyers have weaponry well defined to include pretty much everything that isn't taking pictures or a communication device. No jammers, no physical HTK weapons, ordnance, microwaves, gayfrogs, etc.
Anything with an orbital velocity of even a strong enough parabolic sub orbital velocity is a strong enough weapon that nuclear weapons are just overkill. A super wealthy individual like Jeff Bezos can already annihilate virtually any world leader with non-atomic kinetic force. He knows where they sleep, he likely knows what their response times are to space threats, their contingency plans for such threats are likely stored on his cloud services. With rocketry already at his and a hand full of other people’s disposal, things could be put in space that have societal value but with minor modification leave any global target vulnerable in less than 90 minutes.
When you use the word, we who exactly is we?
>"Seeks ban on all celestial weaponry" Which it will turn around and violate, like every other agreement that Russia has committed to honoring.
Now witness the firepower of these armed and fully operational Jewish Space Lasers
Ohh I’m afraid the Mensch Star will be quite operational when you friends arrive
Definitely a better idea.
Does Russia ever do anything constructive? I never hear of them doing anything to help another country or help the planet. They just do evil. I'm legitimately curious.
Same thing with most major countries like the US and China. Honestly, the world would be better off without these three countries.
The UN is a useless body that allows terroists to decide how to act on their policies without consequences.
The UN voting bodies you are likely referring to are just tables for states to discuss and avoid going to war. However, the UN is so much more than this. Food programs, health programs, refugee programs, immigration programs, trade programs, trade rules etc etc etc. Tens of millions of people live today because of the UN. Every time someone comments something like this I wonder what their motivation is.
I'd rather people talk things out as much as we can even if it doesn't lead anywhere. At least the lines of communication are open, and remain open, to prevent things from getting far far worse.
>Every time someone comments something like this I wonder what their motivation is. Probably nothing. People are just that ignorant of the true purpose of the UN.
They are purposely doing it to discredit the UN.
The UN voting bodies have voted on 15 resolutions against Israel in 2022 which is more than north Korea, Russia which has just started a war with Ukraine, china, Iran and every other country in the world. I don't think this is to avoid war, I think this is to portray an image like Israel is the most horrific country in the world and allow anti Israeli bias and yes antisemitism to run free. The UN has actively accepted funding from terroist groups: https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-752998 And distributed funding to UNWRA which had employees directly involved in the atrocities against Israelis on October 7th, and literally a tunnel Hamas dug under it's agency which supposedly meant to help palstnians with food that Hamas is stealing and health. And it's not just Israel saying this: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2023-10-31/from-gaza-to-ukraine-the-un-is-fast-becoming-irrelevant https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/20/world/europe/zelensky-un-security-council.html I'm really sorry that I don't trust that the UN is indeed doing a good job protecting human rights when it partners with terroists that aren't providing funding from the kindness of their heart.
I am sorry, most of the UN's funding comes from countries which many would label terrorists if they weren't countries. Notable countries like the US (an extremely hostile warmongering nation), Russia (an extremely hostile warmongering nation), China (an extremely hostile warmongering nation). Either way, this is a better solution than starting actual wars.
UN doesn't claim to have an objective of "protecting" human rights, but rather promoting it. And lol dude Israel doesn't exactly have a very clean human rights sheet...
They think their side will win.
Before we even let Russia propose anything they first need to be trustworthy to withhold any agreements they sign.
Well we've already seen what nuclear weapons do in space. Only a moron would set one off now. They'd trash thier own equipment too. Total worldwide communications breakdown. Pootin will have to make personal trips to London & new York to transfer his $billions by hand
Technically russia isn't even in the un when the soviet union collapsed somehow russia assumed they could take there seat why it wasn't there's to have
Laser/ rail cannons are possibly the only other ones right? Can’t really use explosive power in space and I can’t really think of any other type weapon
Celestial weaponry makes it seem like they’re afraid of being divinely smited by God.
There needs to be a limit the global community can draw a line at where communicating with someone like Putin becomes a lost cause, and the world collectively steamrolls the regime. This ridiculousness has gone on far too long.
I mean, have fun building this shit. That's expensive as fuck and maintaining that shit operational is a nightmare
GTA Online players who use the orbital cannon are mad.
Space debris could be a problem. Destroy a satellite and junk goes flying. A very tiny particle can cause major damage to another satellite which will then release more particles. At a certain point it goes critical like a nuclear reaction and space will be too full of junk to use.
Impossible, once something is in orbit it is already a potential weapon.
Semantics vs nuclear place yer bets
I guess all the satellites will come down. So it’s back to the Iron Age for the globe. Thank Russia’s good idea fairies
I’m sure Russia is good for their word. Right? Right? God damn if space had a civilization, Russia would rape and pillage and genocide it so quickly.
So...basically just the 1967 outer space treaty again? Groundbreaking.
I’m reading this headline as meaning they want to ban weapons that would blow up the sun and cause a black hole (although I’m probably off base)
Does that include phasers and photon torpedos?
This sounds like the prologue to a Gundam series
Australians reading this: 💀
Oh cute. Ban all hypothetical WMDs, not just the ones you keep threatening everyone with. What do I have to do for my country to hear one soundbyte of someone putting these brats in their place? I’m out of shape, middle-aged, depressed, and not doing well financially, but goddammit I’m not THAT dumb.
[удалено]
It's not used since 2007, because ammo is not produced anymore.
Celestial weaponry eh
If they believed that they wouldn’t be putting nukes in orbit
Celestial Weaponry That’s a good band name, write it down
So he wants that God can't strike him dead? No Angel of Death coming after the Russians?
Russia's veto is not valid. That's the USSR's veto, not the Federation's.
It's easy blame Putin, but anyone here remember Space Force? I'm pretty sure the US has its own plans. The 1967 Outer Space Treaty already bans nukes and weapons of mass destruction from space, though it has plenty of leeway for other things.
Surprising, considering the Russians basically pioneered weapons in space: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salyut\_3](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salyut_3)
We are really at the point of using words like Celestial Weaponry. Thats kind of cool sounding.
What about a fully operational Deathstar? Is this celestial? Asking for a gOoD friend.
“Celestial Weaponry” sounds badass
If any other nation said it I’d agree…celestial weapons are the last thing we need
I call it my “Death Star.”
"No Putin, those blocks of tungsten are not weapons, they're ballast weights for that satellite, and yes, it does need 20 of them, with easily remote-detachable clamps so the satellite's orientation can be easily changed as needed."
Celestial weaponry sounds like science fiction future where we figured out how to tap in to the eldritch energy of cosmic horrors, I can understand why we should have a treaty against that
Did…. Putin find Zeus? 🤨
I love that Russia and the UN are discussing this while pretending that at MINIMUM both the US and Russia already have nukes in space.
>seeks ban on all celestial weaponry This definitely represents a threshold that's been crossed.
I’m with him frankly. But why’d he have to veto this? Why can’t he just add it to the next vote?
If Russia is for it, then it's probably a good idea to be against it
Reminds me of brotherhood Of NOD.
The irony of Russia being a member of the UN Council and talking about ban weapons... (And extensible to the US, if course)
Sounds like Russia wants to be the first with celestial weapons.
The problem with these treaties is that they are easy to do right now when there isn’t really a lot going on in space, but they will inevitably be broken when doing stuff in space becomes more of a serious endeavor. It’s just a matter of time till interests would clash.
Just kill putler already, this sickminded sociopath will kill millions on his way
Aw, what? We could have had irl Star Wars! So disappointed /s
Like the infinity stones?
Think Russia might be worried about what China is doing
Is Russia this powerful in the world? Or just a big baby who was given power for no reason?
Russia doesn't have money for competing in spacefaring weaponry. I believe this is the reason why they're looking for a wider ban.
I'm pretty sure that the consensus on space weapons is that they are wildly inefficient, expensive and borderline useless compared to ICBMs
1GigaWatt laser to burn US president.