Hacker News Reader

Comment by throwntoday | Hacker News Reader

Again I think you're overstating their importance. Less people are using satellite TV everyday thanks to streaming. Satellite internet is such a miniscule percentage of internet use it might as well be a rounding error. I don't doubt that will change but it will always be a fraction of the market.

As far as military goes, the US armed forces are insanely overpowered. None of that has to do with satellites. There could be a solar flare that knocks out every electronic device and we would still be on top.

It is also highly unlikely the US will ever officially be at war again. Congress would get eaten alive by their constituents. The military exists purely as a show of force, and a means of siphoning away taxpayer money forever.

View on HN

>>>As far as military goes, the US armed forces are insanely overpowered. None of that has to do with satellites. There could be a solar flare that knocks out every electronic device and we would still be on top.

In order to be "on top" we have to be able to project power outside of our borders....borders which happen to be REALLY far from any credible challengers. Our overmatch comes from a well-drilled combination of prolific intelligence collections, robust communications, and precise and timely targeting (including having sufficient information to NOT target friendly forces by accident). ALL of those abilities are heavily reliant on satellites.

Accurate imagery of adversary forces staging equipment for attacks? Those pictures come from satellites. Near-instant awareness every time a ballistic missile launches? Those are detected by infrared sensors on satellites ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-Based_Infrared_System ). Global awareness of where friendly troops are, down to the meter? They are taking GPS-based location data for their positions and sharing it via satellites ( https://asc.army.mil/web/portfolio-item/c3t-jbc-p/ ) ( https://www.iridium.com/products/nal-research-shout-nano-per... ). Need to pass orders and tasking messages to subordinates at geographically-distant, austere locations? Yup....satcom ( https://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/fleet_ops.htm ) Long-range terrestrial radio, for example HF skywave, is less reliable, has a low data rate, and presents a VERY large target for any adversary competent at electronic warfare .....which is both the Russians and the Chinese).

Purely show of force, huh? Must be a fairly recent development.

I thought this "end of history" narrative would be dead by now. It's incredibly naive to think that major wars are a thing of the past. The trade/commerce argument against the political viability of war has been made and debunked in the past. WWI should have been the nail in that coffin but I guess the idea is too appealing to give up.

> In The Great Illusion, Angell's primary thesis was, in the words of historian James Joll, that "the economic cost of war was so great that no one could possibly hope to gain by starting a war the consequences of which would be so disastrous."[4] For that reason, a general European war was very unlikely to start, and if it did, it would not last long.

Published in 1909. Yeah..

Countries have largely stopped declaring war even when they send troops to overthrow a county. It's the kind of distiction the only matters in international politics.

To underscore how silly this is the last time the US “declared” war was 1942. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_war_by_the_Unit...

Well if that was throwntoday's point, it's a distinction without a difference. The Korean War particularly, despite not being officially declared as a war, came disturbingly close to going nuclear.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com