American intelligence agencies have told their closest European allies that if Russia is going to launch a nuclear weapon into orbit, it will probably do so this year — but that it might instead launch a harmless “dummy” warhead into orbit to leave the West guessing about its capabilities.
The American intelligence agencies are sharply divided in their opinion about what President Vladimir V. Putin is planning, and on Tuesday Mr. Putin rejected the accusation that he intended to place a nuclear weapon in orbit and his defense minister said the intelligence warning was manufactured in an effort to get Congress to authorize more aid for Ukraine.
A space weapon would be different. Unlike the rest of the Russian or American arsenals, it would not be designed to hit cities or military sites, or any place on Earth. Instead, it would be nested inside a satellite, capable of destroying swarms of commercial and military satellites circulating alongside it in low-earth orbit, including those like Starlink that are remaking global communications capabilities. It was Ukraine’s ability to connect its government, its military and its leadership over Starlink that played a critical role in the country’s survival in the first months after the Russian invasion, two years ago this week.
Agencies are divided in their assessment of what may come next. Some believe Mr. Putin might launch a “dummy” weapon, but leave it unclear whether it was fake or real — making a response all the more difficult.
Here are the top political news stories for today.
The potential for widespread electromagnetic pulse damage is huge in this scenario. The Starfish Prime nuclear test knocked out streetlights 900 miles away; presumably today's nuclear weapons have the potential do to much worse.
@KoalaAuroraGreen2yrs2Y
Starfish Prime was a high-altitude nuclear test conducted by the United States, at Johnston Atoll on July 9, 1962.
Johnson Atoll is in the MIDDLE of the Pacific ocean. No idea what you're talking about, streetlights? 900 miles from the middle of that atoll is still in the middle of the Pacific ocean.
We will never know. It's like Lay's potato chips: "you can't eat just one". It will all be over very quickly. No one will be left to ponder "worse".
I'm concerned about what Russia is doing, but I don't have to speculate about clandestine activities. I just have to look at their aggression against their neighbors, allies which we are proving to be poor friends of. I just have to look at the disinformation campaign, this Smirnoff guy, and their attempts to undermine democracy around the world. Nukes in space is bad, but I don't need this additional evidence to know that Russia is our enemy, that Ukraine needs our help, and that the Republican party is in Putin's pocket.
@BallotSarahLibertarian2yrs2Y
This idea has been around for at least 50 years. Hardly anything is easier than putting a bomb in orbit. Hardly anything is harder to stop or to detect. The arms race has always been fueled by speculation about potential, theoretical thoughts about what the other side "could" do. The most important statement in this article is that our intelligence community has very low confidence that the Russians will deploy nukes in space.
Just like Putin denied his intention to invade Ukraine even when the entire Russian army was surrounding the country. The great thing about Putin is that you can always trust him to go against his word.
Instead of guessing whether or not they have one, why not start a dialogue, following a "trust but verify" approach. Yes, I understand that the military contractors would profit greatly by putting such a system together for us, but hopefully our politicians can resist such urges and do the right thing.
During such negotiations, it would be a great idea to revisit the two major nuclear arms accords that the US abrogated and the one that the Russians abandoned.
That is expecting too much sanity from our politicians, but it is nevertheless, the right thing to do in an era in which we have two other existential crises, climate change and a rapidly mutating pandemic virus..
@BallotSarahLibertarian2yrs2Y
A dialogue does not reduce the guessing. Putin can say and do whatever he wants to say and do. All we have any control over is how we react and respond.
There is absolutely no reason to trust anything Putin says.
You cannot negotiate with crazy. Putin is getting desparate--and old.
Now the Republican Party is totally in the control of Trump, and Trump is totally under the thumb of Putin, our worst, and most immediate threat is from within.
It is not clear if Republicans can see beyond their love of Trump and their hatred of Biden to think clearly--or think at all. It appears that they are focused on headlines, not legislation or the well-being of our citizenry or nation.
Look at the track record of conspiracy theories – we said COVID came from Wuhan, and the masks were a scam, and the vaccine was poison – and we were right. They said Sadam Hussain had WMDs – they were wrong.
@CivilRightsRobDemocrat2yrs2Y
Well, Putin has been known to be less than truthful, so that tells us nothing. That doesn't mean this is necessarily going to happen, but any statement from him is not exactly adding value to our discussions about it.
@ISIDEWITH2yrs2Y
@ISIDEWITH2yrs2Y
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
