1ac heg Advantage Scenario 1 is Leadership
Download 1.32 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Military space technology is helping war efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq Cleave Pfaltzgraff et al.09
- Private sector will play a larger role for government innovation. The U.S. will benefit the greatest from the private sector Cleave Pfaltzgraff et al.09
Leadership SolvencyHistorically military research has led to the development of ecological research about space colonization Anker 04- Peder Anker received his PhD in history of science from Harvard University in 1999. He is currently a research fellow at the Center for Development and the Environment at University of Oslo, Norway. His works include Imperial Ecology: Environmental Order in the British Empire, 1895-1945 (Harvard, 2001)., “the Ecological Colonization of Space” Forest History Society and American Society for Environmental History p.239-240 http://www.jstor.org/stable/3986114 This article investigates what ecologists sought to do on Mars and what the Martian perspective meant for their understanding of life on Earth. It is a history that originated in military research into constructing self-sufficient closed ecological systems within submarines and underground shelters. In the U.S. space program of the 196os, this know-how was used by leading ecologists to suggest construction of closed ecological systems within space capsules, ships, and colonies. Theirr esearchi nto the ecological "carryingc apacity"f or a given number of astronauts within a spaceship subsequently was used to analyze carrying capacity onboard Spaceship Earth. In the 1970s, environmental ethics became an issue of trying to live like astronauts by adapting space technologies such as bio-toilets, solar cells, recycling, and energy-saving devices to general use. Technology, terminology, and methodology developed for ecological colonization of space became tools for solving environmental problems on Earth. Space colonization caused hardly any controversy until 1975, when royalties from the counterculture sourcebook, The Whole Earth Catalog, were used to finance space-colonization research. In the debate that followed, the overwhelming majority thought space colonies could provide well-functioning environments for astronauts seeking to push human evolutionary expansion into new territories, while also saving a Noah's Ark of earthly species from industrial destruction and possible atomic apocalypse on Earth. To supporters, space colonies came to represent rational, orderly, and wise management, in contrast to the irrational,d isorderlya, nd ill-managedE arth.S ome of them built Biosphere2 in Arizona to prepare for colonization of Mars and to create a model for how life on Earth should be organized. The skeptical minority argued that space colonization was unrealizable or unethical, yet nevertheless adopted terminology, technology, and methodology from space research in their efforts to reshape the social and ecological matrix onboard Spaceship Earth. Military space technology is helping war efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq Cleave & Pfaltzgraff et al.09- Dr. William R. Van Cleave Professor Emeritus Department of Defense and Strategic Studies Missouri State University Dr. Robert L. Pfaltzgraff, Jr. Shelby Cullom Davis Professor of International Security Studies The Fletcher School, Tufts University President, Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis, “Report Independent Working Group on Missile Defense,the Space Relationship,& the Twenty-First Century”, Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis, p. 39-40 http://www.ifpa.org/pdf/IWG2009.pdf The United States must protect its critically important space systems, which are obvious targets for future adversaries who will seek to eliminate the edge those assets give our military forces. This asymmetric U.S. advantage is well known to even limited powers who confront U.S. interests, and they will inevitably strive to reduce that advantage if they seek to attack the United States – and today’s technology makes that possibility a serious concern. Perpetuating the well-known vulnerability of U.S. space assets is, therefore, an unacceptable security risk. The crucial importance of space was clearly highlighted in the early 1990s by the results of the first Gulf War – which the then-Air Force chief of staff, General Merrill McPeak, called the first “space war.”5 More recently, space-based assets, including communications and surveillance systems and sensors, again were essential to the rapid and decisive military victory in Iraq. Operation Iraqi Freedom would have been impossible to conduct with lightning speed and low casualties in the absence of space-based assets providing for unprecedented connectivity among internetted military systems.6 U.S. space systems are also playing a vital role in the current counter-insurgencies in Afghanistan and Iraq. The importance of space systems for the United States and its allies lies in their utter ubiquity throughout the spectrum of conflict at the tactical, operational, and strategic levels of war. The overriding importance of space to our national security was underscored in January 2001 by the “Report of the Commission to Assess United States National Security Space Management and Organization” (the Space Commission) headed by Donald Rumsfeld. How the United States develops space for civil, commercial, defense, and intelligence uses will have profound implications for national security in the next several decades. The commission emphasized that the United States has key national security interests in: Private sector will play a larger role for government innovation. The U.S. will benefit the greatest from the private sector Cleave & Pfaltzgraff et al.09- Dr. William R. Van Cleave Professor Emeritus Department of Defense and Strategic Studies Missouri State University Dr. Robert L. Pfaltzgraff, Jr. Shelby Cullom Davis Professor of International Security Studies The Fletcher School, Tufts University President, Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis, “Report Independent Working Group on Missile Defense,the Space Relationship,& the Twenty-First Century”, Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis, p. 39-40 http://www.ifpa.org/pdf/IWG2009.pdf Governments in turn will rely increasingly on the private sector for a broader range of space products, services, and technologies. While government-sponsored innovation provided the initial catalyst, especially during the Cold War, the private sector will play a growing role in the development of space technologies that have potential military applications in the years ahead. Dual-use space technologies will spin off from the commercial to the military sector in unprecedented ways. This includes areas such as communications and imaging satellites and new launch vehicles as well as telecommunications, the broader availability of imagery, and GPS technologies, products, and services. The private sector will develop new products such as satellites and at the same time offer services such as we see today with telecommunications and imagery. In some cases government programs will produce infrastructure such as satellites and GPS, with the private sector then benefiting from such capabilities. Likewise, the government, including the U.S. military, will contract with the private sector to lease communications and other capabilities. For example, the U.S. military recently contracted with Paradigm Secure Communications, based in the United Kingdom, in an effort to augment the capabilities of the Defense Satellite Communications System (DSCS). The deal, worth up to $48 million over three years, will provide the military with X-band communications using Paradigm’s fleet of Skynet satellites. Currently, the U.S. military receives about 80 percent of its satellite communications capacity from commercial providers. 37 Of course, these basic trends in the growth in a commercial space sector do not guarantee that the United States will be the greatest beneficiary. This obviously depends on strategic choices taken by the United States to exploit such technologies for military purposes. Others bent on benefiting from space technologies will increasingly have access to a global commercial space sector from which they are likely to be capable of spinning off technologies for military purposes if they choose to do so. Therefore, whether or not space is “weaponized” will be increasingly beyond U.S. control as dual-use space technologies become more readily available. Space capabilities need to achieve a wide variety of objectives to be considered vital national interest Logston 03- John M. Logsdon is Director of the Space Policy Institute of George Washington University’s Elliott School of International Affairs in Washington, DC. “REFLECTIONS ON SPACE AS A VITAL NATIONAL INTEREST” p. 11-12 http://www2.gwu.edu/~spi/assets/docs/space_as_a_national_interest.pdf Making space capabilities central to either the operation of the U.S. economy or to successful prosecution of a military operation, without the assurance that those capabilities will be available when needed, is not an attractive prospect to the country’s leaders. Logically, there are two courses of action in response to this observation. One is to assure that the capabilities will be available by protecting them by either military or diplomatic means. The other is not to give them a central role, on the chance that they will be not be available in a crisis situation or will be subject to various technical or market limitations. There is even more uncertainty about the military value, even the wisdom, of developing force application capabilities that can operate in or from space. While some suggest that having the ability to project force from space can enable U.S. global hegemony,17 others judge both that such developments are not in the U.S. national interest, and at any rate may be a quarter century or more in the future.18 A full debate on this issue is just beginning in the United States, and the future contributions of space systems to U.S. power projection is a matter of substantial controversy. One respected analyst has noted that “we lack sound measures of effectiveness and analytic constructs for capturing space's military value today, much less in coming decades.”19 It is not clear, then, that space can be considered today clearly an economic or military center of gravity. Perhaps it is better to see space capabilities as strategic assets important, and in some cases essential, to achieving a wide variety of U.S. economic, political, and security objectives. Whether space by itself already constitutes a “vital national interest” may well be less important than its strategic character in relation to other important U.S. interests. 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 1.32 Mb. Share with your friends:
|