File Title space weaponization good 2
Indo-Pak War 2NC --- Turns Case
Download 1.17 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Indo-Pak War 2NC --- Extinction
- SMIL Bad --- Preemptive Strike
- Space weapons encourage preemptive strikes because of anonymity and detachment from earth
- The vulnerability of space weapons leads to preemptive attacks
Indo-Pak War 2NC --- Turns CaseIndo-Pakistan space war kills GPS and turn caseLewis 4 – Jeffrey Lewis, postdoctoral fellow in the Advanced Methods of Cooperative Security Program at the Center for International and Security Studies at the University of Maryland School of Public Policy, July 2004, “What if Space Were Weaponized?” Center for Defense Information, http://www.cdi.org/PDFs/scenarios.pdf In war games conducting by the United States Navy, very similar scenarios were played out.67 In each of these scenarios, Pakistan used limited nuclear weapon attacks to attempt to disrupt Indian conventional operations. During a conflict in 2010, Pakistan may have a strong incentive to launch preemptive strikes against satellites used by the Indian military for reconnaissance and communications. Such strikes would pose substantial challenges to U.S. security policy. First, even limited strikes against Indian satellites could very well endanger U.S. space assets, including imaging satellites and civil space missions. A 1985 ASAT test conducted by the United States created hundreds of pieces of debris, many of which remained in orbit for a decade. In 1999, one of these pieces of debris came within about one kilometer from the International Space Station. 68 Although unlikely, the National Academy of Sciences has warned of the possibility of “collisional cascading” from debris impacts at crowded altitudes.69 High altitude nuclear detonations could also create substantial collateral damage, through electromagnetic pulse (EMP) and radiation effects. Second, Pakistan might target third-party satellites used by the Indian Army. Potential targets would include commercial imaging and communications satellites, as well as the GPS or European Galileo system if Indian forces were allowed to utilize those services during an offensive. Such attacks would have unanticipated affects on the United States. In one war game, the United States faced what one participant called “ugly choices” about commercial satellites being used by potential opponents. Participants discovered that they were unable to determine who might be affected by a decision to shoot down a commercial satellite. This, according to one participant, “vastly complicates the national security landscape.”70 Indo-Pak War 2NC --- ExtinctionIndia-Pakistan nuclear war destroys the ozone layer and causes extinctionFox 8 – “India-Pakistan Nuclear War Would Cause Ozone Hole” by Maggie Fox, April 8th, 2008, Planet Ark, http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/47829/story.htm Eight nations are known to have nuclear weapons, and Pakistan and India are believed to have at least 50 weapons apiece, each with the power of the weapon the United States used to destroy Hiroshima in 1945. Mills said the study added a new factor to the worries about what might damage the world's ozone layer, as well as to research about the effects of even a limited nuclear exchange. "The smoke is the key and it is coming from these firestorms that build up actually several hours after the explosions," he said. "We are talking about modern megacities that have a lot of material in them that would burn. We saw these kinds of megafires in World War Two in Dresden and Tokyo. The difference is we are talking about a large number of cities that would be bombed within a few days." Nothing natural could create this much black smoke in the same way, Mill noted. Volcanic ash, dust and smoke is of a different nature, for example, and forest fires are not big or hot enough. The University of Colorado's Brian Toon, who also worked on the study, said the damage to the ozone layer would be worse than what has been predicted by "nuclear winter" and "ultraviolet spring" scenarios. "The big surprise is that this study demonstrates that a small-scale, regional nuclear conflict is capable of triggering ozone losses even larger than losses that were predicted following a full-scale nuclear war," Toon said in a statement. SMIL Bad --- Preemptive StrikeSpace weaponization leads to hair trigger posture in spaceKrepon and Clary 3 – Michael Krepon, served as the president and CEO of the Henry L. Stimson Center, Christopher Clary, Research Assistant for the Weaponization of Space Project at the Stimson Center, April 2, 2003, “Space Assurance or Space Dominance? The Case Against Weaponizing Space,” Henry L. Stimson Center, http://www.stimson.org/images/uploads/research-pdfs/spacebook.pdf During the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union maintained nuclear forces on hair trigger alert, ready to be fired within minutes of an order to launch. One of the likely consequences of seeking a space dominance posture would be to elevate this hair trigger posture into space. Space weapons would beget space mines; ASATs would beget more ASATs. The side that shoots first in space would cross a critical threshold in the history of combat, but it would not alter the dynamics of asymmetric warfare. If the United States carries out preemptive strikes in space, it would still expect retaliation in unconventional ways. And if the weaker party carries out a surprise attack in space, it would still expect a devastating response. Nonetheless, both potential adversaries would perceive more value in shooting first than in asking questions later. Space weapons encourage preemptive strikes because of anonymity and detachment from earthRuhm 3 – Brian C. Ruhm is a major in the U.S. Air Force, April 2003, "Finding the Middle Ground: The U.S. Air Force, Space Weaponization, and Arms Control," http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/acsc/03-1394.pdf Other characteristics of the space environment reinforce space weapons’ destabilizing tendencies. The first is anonymity. Especially with respect to ASAT weapons, space may provide a degree of plausible deniability that would encourage attacks on space assets. The vastness of space and its isolation from population centers may also contribute to a perceived lack of collateral damage. An adversary could launch an attack on space assets with little or no risk of directly harming any human population. A related consideration for the US is that it may be hard pressed to justify responding to such a non-lethal attack, in terms of human lives, even if it vaporized billions of dollars in assets and undermined valuable earth services. These considerations could all reinforce an adversary's inclination to preemptively attack in space. Short of achieving absolute space supremacy, there is little that the US could do to avert this situation. James Oberg comes to a similar conclusion near the end of his book Space Power Theory, which was commissioned by then Commander in Chief of US Space Command General Howell M. Estes III. Oberg writes that "the possibility of a preemptive strike in space will become all too likely. The strategic military gain, system vulnerability, and detachment from an earthbound public's concerns will combine to render space a target much too tempting to pass over." The vulnerability of space weapons leads to preemptive attacksTannenwald 3 – Nina Tannenwald is a research professor at Brown University, Ph.D. in international relations and political theory from Cornell, April 2003, "Law Versus Power on the High Frontier: The Case for a Rule-Based Regime for Outer Space," http://drum.lib.umd.edu/bitstream/1903/7902/1/tannenwald.pdf In terms of their geostrategic impact, space-based weapons do not simply enhance existing threats but introduce a new and greater danger because of the threat they pose to strategic stability. The vulnerability of space-based weapons will likely create incentives for preemptive attack to protect them during a crisis, greatly increasing the likelihood of war. Further, although supporters of space weapons claim that, consistent with the United States' defensive orientation to the world, such weapons would be for defensive purposes, the reality is that, given their characteristics, many of them are inherently offensive weapons. It is widely recognized that space-based ballistic missile defense systems could carry out surprise attacks against terrestrial targets or satellites. Directory: files files -> Answer True False 2 points Question 2 files -> Integer programming and game theory files -> 4 Integer Programming files -> Bpa vehicle Window Repair Scenario #1 task: Procure vehicle window relacement. Objective files -> Pop Warner History files -> North Carolina Inclusion Initiative Mapping Where Children with ieps are Being Served Purpose files -> Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Program Data: Standard 1 Exhibit 4d files -> Hanban – asia society confucius classrooms network 2010 request for proposal files -> Northern England’s set-jetting locations Download 1.17 Mb. Share with your friends:
|