Military defense strengthened after successful missile launch
In a maneuver which received an incredulous amount of media attention, the US military successfully shot down a broken spy satellite in mid-February. Naturally, any activity which involves expenditures of tens of millions of dollars and an object flying into space is bound to receive media coverage, yet this incident was magnified as a political statement on the part of the US.
Safety and health reasons were cited as the reason for the unorthodox use of a missile: Worries spread that the fuel tank containing toxic fuel would not combust in the fall to earth. If the said tank were to fall on land, especially in a populated area, lives could be lost, according to official government statements. However, other unofficial theories have been projected, mostly as criticisms, as to why the US military would undertake such an unusual and surprising move.
Many have deemed the missile launch as a test of US missile defense, and more importantly as a political statement of American capabilities and military potential aimed chiefly at the powers of Russia and China. Furthermore, there have been outcries labeling the official safety reasons given as bogus, claiming that there was no plausible, inherent danger posed by the satellite. It is true that these analyses do seem to explain the situation well and coupled with the possible safety question, they do give the US justification for use of taxpayer money, an expense trivial in comparison to certain other misallocations of government funds.
The layman may be critical of the government for not listing possible "actual" reasons for the destruction of this satellite, yet in not giving any causes other than safety, the government has tactfully performed an action to keep the other large military powers in check. Moreover, an actual experiment which proves that our country's missile defense system does work, since the satellite was hit and destroyed, is beneficial as a way of ensuring safety, without drastic and questionable measures as a pre-emptive strike. Additionally, no transgressions on foreign property or soil were made. Both satellite and missile were American and though it does show that the United States has potential to target foreign satellites, other nations have this capability also, most notably China, which recently destroyed one of its satellites in a like manner.
Therefore, even if there had been no direct danger posed by the falling satellite, a periodic testing of a country's defenses is necessary. Regardless of the remoteness of war, all nations need to have an adequate response system to all plausible threats and just as the public defense sirens are tested on a monthly basis in the state of Minnesota, a periodic testing of a far more vital and life-saving technology should be looked upon favorably.
Comments
Post new comment