Hacker News Reader

Comment by ggm | Hacker News Reader

So the story is: Iran has a satellite, and like any other satellite it's not very risky and this leads to the other story: is blocking Iran from science and research in space actually helping? And the answer is probably not, and also nobody is going to unwind this kind of stupidity very soon.

I think it would achieve more to help Iran with payloads than get snitty about a cubesat.

And say they did get high resolution imaging into space and started looking at US or Israeli or Saudi military and strategic assets.. isn't that kind of normal? Might it not actually help pacify things by giving them incontrovertible evidence there isn't a risk of invasion?

View on HN

The powers that been do not give a toss about Iran having access to cubesat tech. That isn't the end of the rocket they are worried about. It is the booster, the thing that can also throw bombs around as easily as cubesats, that really worries them. The bans on payload-specific tech are just a tiny extension of the more meaningful bans on core rocket technology.

The likelihood of a US ban preventing ICBM development when the basics are inherent and already known?

Nothing in the story really related to this risk. But, you are probably right it's the latent fear. The ban only drives Iran closer to Russia. Why buy US tech when you can cut out the middleman and go to the same source the US does for engines? (I know they don't buy much any more but they did for a while, and presumably the Iranians can operate a Russian engine as well as the Americans can)

All the powers that be might be happy to step into the gaps left by the others, but I'm not sure that automatically means they throw them ballistic missile tech outright. That would also not be in the Russian's interest to some extent too.

>> US ban preventing ICBM development

The ban is about delay, not the absolute of prevention. That much is working. Iran is having to develop technology locally as opposed to simply importing it. Without any restrictions, Iran would simply purchase ICBMs and deploy them in a matter of weeks.

A delay would be logical if it provided time to develop a countermeasure. But other than point-defence ABM systems there is no universal countermeasure, practical or in development.

The delay isn't about just about technical countermeasures. It's about giving time for other options to work. These could have included: engagement and diplomacy, regime change, or direct action.

In addition, by increasing the cost of developing these systems, you force hostile (or non-friendly) governments to split their resources. Every bit of funding that went into building a rocket is a bit of funding that doesn't go to Quds Force.

I believe the game plan is to starve the population during the delay, fostering dissent (or just chaos) so a puppet government will be in place before the icbms.

Because that went so well the last time, after all.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9...

> isn't that kind of normal?

Yeah, and isn't taking steps to oppose them every step of the way normal as well? We (america & allies) have to protect our interests.

Yes, the whole concept is just stupid. Export regulations on technology empower both our international adversaries and commercial rivals.

I'm glad I don't work for cubesatkit.com. The principal(s) of that company are about to have a very bad time.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com