Not that the US ever gave a shit about international treaties.

To be fair, this move is coming after fairly strong evidence that Russia and China have been breaking the treaty by deploying weapons into space for years. Which the US has highlighted many times in the past.

At some point you have to acknowledge that the treaty is no longer being respected, and match capabilities to avoid being left at a disadvantage.

That said, I'm sure there were tons of people in the US military establishment who had been pushing for this for decades and were ecstatic at being allowed to do it at a broad scale.

▲

voidUpdate 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Russia was at least planning to launch a space-to-space laser back in 1987, but the prototype (essentially just a mass simulator, no lasers inside) failed on launch quite spectacularly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyus_(spacecraft)

	▲	_djo_ 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Russia also seems to have tested the release of a sub-satellite from another satellite, perhaps a precursor to a kinetic space-launched weapon. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/secretive-russian...

▲

aa-jv 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>fairly strong evidence

Got some?

▲

_djo_ 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Sure.

https://www.ifri.org/en/studies/current-and-future-trends-ch...

https://www.swfound.org/publications-and-reports/2026-global...

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01402390.2024.2...

https://www.thespacereview.com/article/4431/1

https://www.uscc.gov/sites/default/files/Annual_Report/Chapt...

▲

aa-jv 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I see a lot of fear-mongering reports from sources claiming authority.

I don't see any evidence.

▲

_djo_ 3 hours ago | parent [-]

What kind of evidence are you expecting? Detailed photographs of the satellites on orbit?

These are credible institutions, with their statements regarding unusual orbital movements backed up by observations made by several independent groups.

▲

etiennebausson 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I personally don't trust elements provided by U.S. agencies and foundations since the Irak war and the "proof" they delivered to justify it.

Proxy at work is stopping me from reading most of grandparent links, so it'll have to wait for home.

▲

mc32 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It’s like they’ll believe any rumors about the US doing things but then need concrete evidence irrefutable evidence when it comes to its adversaries.

▲

aa-jv 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I'd like to see evidence which supports the claims and not have to rely on a call to authority fallacy[1] in order to agree with this collective-derived reality.

I have no doubt that there are weapons in space - Russian, Chinese, American - why wouldn't there be? - but I still want to see actual evidence.

None of the sources you give are impartial - all of them serve to profit from perpetuating fear of Chinese space activities.

Too often, xenophobic movements rely on authority figures to perpetuate their myths. Don't you agree?

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

▲

voidUpdate 3 hours ago | parent [-]

What evidence would satisfy you that there are weapons in space? You either have to check yourself somehow, or trust a third party. Is there a third party you trust to provide evidence?

▲

aa-jv 3 hours ago | parent [-]

The article from The Space Review comes pretty close to providing some actual evidence.

There are no trustworthy third parties when it comes to xenophobic agitprop.

▲

voidUpdate 3 hours ago | parent [-]

What extra would you want from the space review article that would constitute actual evidence for you?

▲

aa-jv 2 hours ago | parent [-]

There are lots of claims and speculation that China is developing space weapons, and there is an allusion to evidence (but no actual evidence) - and maybe China is fully committed to space battles in the near future - but I think the more important question is, why should I care that China is doing this?

The US has space weapons, too - it has also demonstrated the same capabilities recently, with regards to destroying defunct satellites and using lasers to disable communications.

But .. of the two nations, the only entity that I truly worry about, is the USA and its allies - given what they have done on the surface of the planet, what they do in space is far more worrying ..

	▲	andsoitis an hour ago \| parent [-]
		> There are lots of claims and speculation that China is developing space weapons, and there is an allusion to evidence (but no actual evidence) Why do you keep avoiding the question?

▲

Gregkion 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

And USA for sure didn't do that...

▲

_djo_ 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

If they did, then all three are equally guilty of breaching the treaty and making weapons in space a new norm. That's plausible, sure.

If they didn't, it makes sense why they'd choose to compete on the same playing field now, as the norm is already broken.

None of what I'm posting is about saying the US are the 'good guys' here. Neither the US, Russia, nor China are 'good' for creating a new space arms race that puts everyone at more risk. It might be something we can understand from a purely rational perspective while disliking that it's happening.

	▲	maxglute 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		>equally guilty Not really, LBH, if RU and PRC ask US to kneecap US launch tempo or set some Washington naval treaty tonnage to space limits, US would lol. Rationally US (hegemonic stability) is incentivized to be uniquely bad, i.e. significantly MORE guilty of introducing new/more escalatory arms race conditions by virtue of having most space capability/tech stack, and incentivized to maintain capability gap. US typical the one pushing boundaries to seek absolute security because it cannot (and currently does not have to) accept parity. Followed by RU simply because they're broke and have to do desperate shit like Cosmos 2542. Meanwhile PRC counterspace rollout has been within norm, i.e. match capability of others, land->space direct ascent ASAT, coorbital rendezvous / proximity ops, EW/dazzlers (land+space). PRC cooking from the regular menu, partly because catchup, but PRC also way past RU in space now, but hasn't introduced any destabilizing novel counter space tech that would escalate space arms race except doing normal stuff at scale that triggers US anxiety over size of gap. But ultimately, no one is forcing US to break meta continuously because it rationally won't accept vulnerability. DoD/W didn't have to weaponize SpaceX... but they did, so we should not be surprised in future if general international space admin/order breaks down in future. i.e. US/SpaceX got first come first serve dibs on favourable civilian LEO orbital shells assignment from UN/ITU, but now SpaceX now civil military fusion platform, so probably expect PRC counter space mega constellations to simply ignore US space entitlements in future.

▲

TitaRusell 25 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

We don't know what the US does. They are just as enigmatic as the Chinese to the point that US Congress is not even allowed to learn about the secret projects.