Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine Is Redrawing the Geopolitics of Space - ISS

I am from autocratic country Belarus, and over years I actually came up with, maybe unpopular, opinion that it is good to forcefully impose democracy on other countries. Please do it on my native country.

Because after some point, autocratic government goes against people's will, and can even resemble occupation of its own nation. Like literally 3% of the population repress the other 97%. All means of overturning the government and are violently suppressed at their roots.

I can't agree enough about invasions being bad. You acknowledge the issue with the US so I'll abstain from Pot-Kettle analogies. Although, I would ask that your awareness of current conflicts the US is engaged in actually become part of your radar. If what you claim you want to happen you truly want to happen, you would acknowledge that those negative repercussions should be happening right now because we have never stopped violently interfering in other countries and their affairs. We're literally dropping bombs as I type this. So check your false pearl-clutching and feigned concessions.

I'm not 'pretending' to be concerned about the telescope. I am absolutely concerned about the progress of things that work to unite us instead of dividing us. Based on your previous comment you should be as well.

Thanks for just avoiding the issue I raised and attacking me though. Functional discourse at it finest here on HackerNews.

Despite differences, not despite wars.

I think if anyone has proven anything here, it is Russia and Russia alone.

Getting upset at Germany for cancelling some scientific cooperation in response to literally invading a sovereign country and shelling civilian cities is, just, absurd.

It should perhaps be mentioned that Spektr-RG is not on the ISS, it's in a halo orbit around L2 (like Webb):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spektr-RG

You're talking about the U.S. invasion of Iraq, right? Where the Shock & Awe campaign killed ... between 0 and 6600 civilians [0]? Where 188k+ have died in the 19 years since the Neocons invaded [1]?

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_and_awe#Casualties

[1] https://www.IraqBodyCount.org/analysis/reference/press-relea...

Where GWB joked about having tricked the Country into doing the Neocons' dirty work [2]?

[2] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/mar/26/usa.iraq / https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWD6pGQCwM8

I don't trust the media to be honest about what's actually happening in Ukraine.

One advantage of propping it up is so that they don't all leave to NK/Iran to build ICBMs.

>It isn't a question of political nuance,

Here is what the crew of the international space station was doing one day after US ground forces entered Iraq:

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/johnson/news/station/2003/iss03...

youre an american, right? so i get that working for foreign "regime change" is normalized to you.

South to north orbital ICBMs, just the first one that comes to mind.

Control of the most effective communications and transportation available to humans.

If you have that you can build an empire.

That's become a fact that much of science is funded from geo political factions. the further atomic combustion development is certainly a great example. it doesn't mean all science is, nor should be. you make it sound like the purpose of science research is to pursue particular political pursuits. and by doing that you are implicitly endorcing this view.

A reminder of significant science discoverers through history: Pythagoras, Archimedes, Aristotle, Da Vinci, Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, Maxwell, Plank, Bohr, Einstein.

one could hardly see a trend of politically funded or motived pursuits. what (most of) the greatest scientists have in common is that they researched and pushed science further on the name of science, most weren't funded politically, quite the opposite, some were in strict opposition with political status quo and were impeded by it.

I would agree that modern "science" has been for a large part corrupted by monetary gains, hijacked by private enterprises, governments, and (mis) guided by such. It may have always been so, all the future generations get to see is what's left of it, the skimmed gems that anyhow gets out of the few brilliant minds of the entire humanity.

It doesn't imply we should make it seem normal nor a desirable. Science in it's millenia long history, what it accomplished and the figures who accomplished it, their background, affiliation and funding (or lack of) isn't reflective of our current model. that is what my parent comment tries to highlight. Even Science magasine, one of the most respected journal, is increasingly discrediting itself by publishing politically heavy articles and headlines.

they could have kept this article apolitical, the title instead is so politically heavy it is borderline click bait or a tone of a state press conference statement.

down votes is only a reflection, what science has turned into is even being swallowed as legitimate even by one of the most technically educated fringe of our society. The HN readers.

war is one potential consequence of political struggles. Debates, PR, propaganda, votes, are political positioning and actions that may promote and justify war, or condemn, sanction, and pressure for the end of it. commenting, debate, PR, propaganda, votes in reaction to war is again political pursuits to shape the outcome of war. I'm pointing at the Science article, which is tainted by aspects of the second category. I'm not commenting on the war itself. politics isn't just arguments in parliament, parliament debates are public, procedural executions of democratically formed institutions. politics take place far beyond, swallow in the media, educational institutions, the private sectors, and now even our retired grand mom who is prompted to take a side, perhaps by sending donations via platforms she's recently discovered how to use.

Then, not one Russian astronaut would be allowed in a NASA project in a spatial scale of time, probably.