Sponsor

wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

Space Wars

Tuesday, February 26, 2008

Theresa Hitchens, director of the Center for Defense Information, discusses the spy satellite shoot-down and puts it in the context of space weaponization.

Guests:

Theresa Hitchens

Comments [7]

Freddy Jenkins

I did hear on one of the Morning Shows the invocation that the shootdown was also an unveiling of SDI--I didn't get a chance to hear much more on it, but I did know that my stomach tightened and that ol' sinking feeling I had during the Cold War returned....

Feb. 26 2008 10:46 AM
Vote this comment up Vote this comment down Score: 0/0
big man from manhattan

hahahhahaha i knew they were lying to us a space shuttle burns up in the atmosphere and a tiny satellite is a "grave" danger to the planet?...pleaaaaaaaaase

Feb. 26 2008 10:42 AM
Vote this comment up Vote this comment down Score: 0/0
John from New Jersey

I found this alarming. Weaponizing space or shooting things out of space can only seen as a step we cannot retreat from.

The argument was flawed from the outset. Initally, the government claimed there was little to no chance of danger from the re-entry of the satellite. How is is that a Space Shuttle can burn up and not injure anyone on the ground in a highly populated area yet a 1000 pound satellite is a grave danger?

This is a dangerous precedent on the part of China and the US. Media coverage was pure party line propaganda.

Feb. 26 2008 10:24 AM
Vote this comment up Vote this comment down Score: 0/0
hjs from 11211

how do clinton obama and mccain stand on the weaponization of space.

Feb. 26 2008 10:19 AM
Vote this comment up Vote this comment down Score: 0/0
Vic from Queens

Aviation Week and Space Technology broke the story a couple of weeks ago, when the Pentagon first stated that the NRO satellite had gone feral. Since that time, the US Media parroted Pentagon briefings, without looking to objective experts for any other view point.

Can you discuss what could have been our goverment's motives for this shoot-down, other than the official line?

Can you discuss some possible reasons my much of the US Media didn't dig any farther than the Penatgon's official line?

Thanks, and especially thank you for covering this otherwise uncovered story.

Feb. 26 2008 10:17 AM
Vote this comment up Vote this comment down Score: 0/0
James from Linden, NJ

Only on the PBS News Hour was there a scientific analysis of the reason the US Government gave for shooting down the satellite. In this analysis, the reason was completely debunked by an MIT physics professor. The professor pointed out that given the 50g decelleration of the satellite once it entered the atmosphere, a thin walled fuel tank would not be able to survive re-entry and the fuel would burn up well before it reached the ground. Given this, it's clear that this was an excuse to test the missle defense system.

Feb. 26 2008 10:13 AM
Vote this comment up Vote this comment down Score: 0/0
superf88

Ms. HItchens: Did you think the US Media did a decent job of covering the shoot-down announced by the US military last week?

I was surprised that that day's coverage including NPR (with the exception of Steve Inskeep's one report) stated simply that "the satellite, which carried dangerous fuel, was successfully shot down."No mention of the point you are speaking to today -- the fun bit!

Feb. 26 2008 08:42 AM
Vote this comment up Vote this comment down Score: 0/0

Leave a Comment

Register for your own account so you can vote on comments, save your favorites, and more. Learn more.
Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. Names are displayed with all comments. We reserve the right to edit any comments posted on this site. Please read the Comment Guidelines before posting. By leaving a comment, you agree to New York Public Radio's Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use.







URL

If you enter anything in this field your comment will be treated as spam
Location
* Denotes a required field