China accused the US of not 'practicing what they preach'. This came in repsonse to today's shooting down of a spy satetllite that was no longer functioning by the US.
But just a year ago, when China shot down one of their own weather satellites, the US codemned it saying "China's testing of such weapons is inconsistent with the spirit of cooperation that both countries aspire to in the civil space area," per White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe.
The US justified their actions in stating the satellite posed a hazard to the earth's atmosphere and potentially people. In contrast, the destruction of the Chinese satellite resulted in a cloud of "space junk", which could have damaged other orbiting satellites.
Is this a matter of double standards or a justifiable excuse on behalf of the environment? (For more information on this topic see, "China accuses US of double standards over satellite strike")
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Didn’t the US Navy also leave quite a lot of unspent fuel and bits of shattered satellite (once the size of a VW bus?) at a lower level orbit as a result of their recent strike? I don’t think that the US has a very strong argument, if this is the strongest point in support of our actions.
Great job with your blog, Angie! It certainly seems as though you’ve managed to work your frequent submissions to this space into your regular routine, and your reactions to relevant news events fit squarely into the course material.
Jamie Anderson
Angie,
There are several sides to this incident. It is likely that the U.S. did use the hydrazine issue as an excuse to test its anti-satellite weapon and to show the world that it could also dispatch satellites. Otherwise, there was little justification for taking this action. If left alone the hydrazine tank would have likely been breached upon re-entry and the fuel would have either dissipated or be consumed due to the high temperatures. Even if it had landed intact the odds of causing damage would have been remote. We wonder why we have developed such a bad reputation, especially during this decade.
On the other side of the issue the Chinese satellite was at a very much higher altitude and was not in danger of reentering any time soon. Destroying it resulted in many smaller pieces, all at the same altitude and traveling at the same velocity; there they will remain as debris for a long time.
The debris from the destroyed U.S. satellite, traveling at its much lower altitude and velocity, will reenter much more rapidly and will therefore not remain as space junk.
Norm
While I think Norm makes some good points, this whole venture smells to be like more show than substance. They say they were successful. What if they were not? Who would know? Not likely anyone - whether initially intact or not, debris is debris is debris. I do not beleive for one minute that environmental concerns were sincere. When has the US military or the Bush regime ever been sincere about environmental concerns? What I suspect it was about is guarding secrets. The US did not want the satellite to enter intact because if the Chinese retrieved major intact portions of it they could steal the technology. Steve
Post a Comment