Russia Bans Rocket Engine Sales to U.S. Military
bloomberg.com
bloomberg.com
I think you could argue that ULA, by outsourcing the engines, is what threatens the operation. How is it Space X's fault?
> Musk’s Space Exploration Technologies Corp. has sued the U.S. Air Force, claiming it created an illegal monopoly for the military’s satellite launch business.
All SpaceX did was publicize that issue, everything before and after that was entirely the governments doing (the sanctions in the first place were on the government, and the injunction on the ULA was placed by a judge, not SpaceX. The injunction was lifted, again by the government, and the governments currently poor diplomatic relations with Russia inspired Russia to essentially make the injunction stick)
In other words, the ULA is just whining that SpaceX tattled on them. Any real blame lies with either the people who made the rules, or with the people who broke the rules (or both).
When you lie, publicly, about big things, you no longer get believed. It's just that simple.
Normally I'm all for technological progress. But maybe just this once I'd be OK with postponing our advancement as a spacefaring species if it means we can get a peaceful resolution in Ukraine.
I am all in favor of peace.
We in the west can't necessarily control what Russia does. But we can (or should be able to) control what we do. I certainly don't think sending senators and state department officials to meet with coup leaders in the day before the coup and the constant stream of hostile talk helps anything.
Not supporting Russia annexing Ukraine. Just so no one gets the wrong idea.
For everybody else, Google Georgian conflict and compare it to what's going on in Ukraine.
Hint: US tried to back Georgian military in a proxy attack and got shut down.
If you don't think it's a bis suspicious for US to be so actively involved in this I have a bridge to sell you.
(yes, we're getting increasingly scared here)
Also, I might be biased, because I live not that far from the Ukrainian border and I would feel much safer if the US stayed away from this.
Edited to add:
I'm also less concerned about US not getting military launches and more about the future of the ISS. The Space Station is more than just a research post in a cold place; it's a monument, a symbol, of a bright future, of a peaceful progress of whole mankind. Losing ISS wouldn't be just a bad day for science, it would impact many people's hopes and dreams.
Edit: to be clear, I'm not being hyperbolic here, the "coup" in question literally consisted of the elected representatives of the Ukranian people kicking out the president, who I think even belonged to the same party as a number of the ringleaders.
Edit 2: yep, "The Ukrainian parliament, which decisively abandoned Yanukovich after loyalists defected, declared on Saturday the president constitutionally unable to carry out his duties and set an early election for May 25."[1] His own former political allies voted to give him the boot.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2014/02/ukraine-parliam...
In fact, the president _illegally_ fled the country (on a Russian navy ship) leaving the parliament no choice but to appoint an acting president until the elections (which will be on May 25).
And the number of people present voting.
I suppose during peaceful democratic transitions of power this is a bit unusual to say the least. But ya... coup.
That is the question you would have to ask him. AFAIK, not a single official from his government or staff or party has been arrested or hurt since the president fled. As I said, he could return to the country, but he chose not to.
They had at least one guy (Bashkalenko) handcuffed on stage during the protests. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTqveUVU70g
But I really don't want to argue about it anymore. I realize the people of Ukraine had legitimate grievances. I don't think Russia should own Ukraine. I don't think the CIA or anyone else instigated the coup. I just don't think Washington should have had the state department in the middle of it. And I think they should tone down the hostile talk.
I would consider that an allusion to a desired outcome.
But agreed with the poster above who mentions political bickering. It won't get anyone anywhere. Besides, I've made my view known, I think it is just good sense on the part of the west to seek peace rather than hostility, I don't think not being unreasonably hostile in rhetoric and deed is capitulation and I don't have anything else to say.
Would be cool if that actually happened. The President signed a deal with the opposition then left the country. His parliament then voted to impeach him. How is that a coup?
violence? check.
illegal? look at the number required vs those who voted to remove from office.
I'm not saying the guy wasn't corrupt. But, look at some of those who are running the show now. They aren't a whole lot better. Avakov, the cheerleader for immediate violent action against the eastern insurgants for instance.
This all began in October I believe. Is 4 months sudden? All of the violence was provoked from the government (him). The opposition definitely took advantage of it and are not entirely innocent in all of this. Corruption has always been a problem in Ukraine will be for the foreseeable future. This guy took it to another level.
just to get that out there.
The area has been culturally Russian for a very long time. I don't see how this is a bad thing.
And I consider there are at least two parties at fault in this. Is there anything we can do to rectify the situation or do we need to spend 20% of our respective GDPs on arms for the next umpteen years and fight a dozen proxy wars around the globe?
I don't know... just asking.
But yeah, this is not sound fiscal planning on Russia's part.
"sound fiscal plans" have never been endemic to Russia.
anyway, it was easily predicted :) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7649064
I think some rocket components were produced in Ukraine, not sure if that applies to this. So maybe they don't want a limited supply diminished.
If true, this is a significant wrinkle in the story.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuzhnoye_Design_Bureau (search for Antares :)
But who do you think NATO should attack next with a wink and a smile? Ah yes, whoever dares to challenge the petrodollar, right? If that's the case then taking away their rockets is a good step for humanity.
My hopes for making you just a little more cynical about these things are low, but please try and open your eyes. What is the first thing that happens in every country that gets "freedomed" by the NATO. The oil fields get secured, the installed regime continues selling oil in US dollars at agreeable prices, and the society descends into chaos... but the oil fields are secure.
Do you disagree that Ukraine is a polarized country and that the Euromaidan does not speak for the whole country?
#NSA #XKeyscore #Snowdengate #PRISM #DroneStrikes #TSA. Thank you for your freedom.
The truth is, the "West" is not that much better in a moral sense, it's just that it controlls the global narrative thanks to, in a big part, Hollywood.
The Russian economy is much worse off, however. Competitiveness and industrial development have been neglected by the regime that's happy to siphon off profits from unrefined natural exports. Quality of life is not improving, corruption is rife as ever, wages and pensions can go unpaid.
Lately the government seems to be trying to shift blame onto foreigners and deviants, and so increasing numbers of Caucasian immigrant workers and homosexuals are getting beat up or murdered.
Medvedev talked the talk on much-needed economic development, but turns out he was just a puppet. There doesn't seem to be much hope for change in the near future.
I am not sure NATO is going to attack a country with ICBMs and active nuclear warheads over Ukraine which is not part of the alliance.