Space Insfrastructure AFF 3.0 (3)

8/10/2019 Space Insfrastructure AFF 3.0 (3)

1/22

Aff Outline

I.InherencyA.Heavy Lift Capacity is underfunded both thru NASA and thru commercialB.Next eneration commerical HLC underfunded

C. Specific pro!rams underfunded

II.Harms

A.lo"#cost HLC $ital for %S Space &ransportation InfrastructureB.Lo"#cost HLC vital for asteroid moon mars and solar po"er mission successC.lo"#cost commercial heavy lift capacity essential for space exploration

Adv'.(esource )epletion * +nvironmentA.lac, of resources dooms man,ind to extinction

B. Asteroid -inin! feasible and ensuresC.Solar po"er ensures resources

Adv.+conomy

Adv/.He!emony

Adv0.Asteroid CollisionA.Inevitable Asteroid "ill collide "ith the earthB.Collision 1 +xtinction Level +vent

C.Asteroid -inin! creates techonolo!y for successful asteroid diversion

plan # %S2 shall substantially increase fundin! for Space &ransp InfrastructureHLCapacity pro3ects.

SolvencyA. NASA can develop cost#competitive HLC throu!h Orion roc,etB.Commericial can develop )ra!on proves

'


2/22

Initially we note Observation I. I nherency

A. United States Space Transportation Infrastructure depends on

advances in Heavy Lift Capacity technology for fulfillent of

space ob!ectives

)o) Space &echnolo!y uide 44' 5)ept of )efense Space&echnolo!y uide6 2iscal year 444#44'6 National Space Studies Center6 Air %niversity-ax"ell Air 2orce Base6 -ont!omery6 Alabama6

http7**space.au.af.mil*!uides*st!*6http7**space.au.af.mil*!uides*st!*st!8transportation.pdf9Space Transportation encopasses space launch and orbit transfer vehicles and

related propulsion systes for the traditional spacelift issions of delivering

payloads to orbit and on"orbit spacecraft propulsion for station"#eeping$ pluseerging issions such as on"orbit refueling$ servicing$ aintenance$ repositioning$

and recovery. The DoD employs both military andcommercialexpendable launch vehicles, occasionally augmentedby use of NASAs Space Shuttle.Military launch systems currently comprise an array of medium- and heavy-lift expendable boosters. The Air Force, NASA and industry are collaborativelyfunding reusable propulsion technologies ith Air Force funding beingdirected toard supporting militarily uni!ue capabilities. "oth independentlyand in partnership ith NASA, industry is developing reusable boosters to add

to the launch system inventory and to loer coststo orbit. #n addition to military launches, there could be as many as $%%commercial launches orldide over the next &% years if costs and ris's canbe signi(cantly reduced. The )o) is see'ing to ease present bottlenec's inaccess to space via*+ #ncreased privatiation of the launch infrastructureto broaden the launch base+ A launch-on-demand capability,especially for Space ontrol andother missions here timelinessto orbit or reconstitution of highdemandspace-based systems

may be paramount.This area represents the sine qua nonof space poer* unless sucient liftcapability becomes readily availableat signi(cantly less cost, /.S. capabilitiesto place its pro0ected systemson orbit in sucient !uantities toachieve mission ob0ectives ill
http://space.au.af.mil/guides/stg/http://space.au.af.mil/guides/stg/stg_transportation.pdfhttp://space.au.af.mil/guides/stg/http://space.au.af.mil/guides/stg/stg_transportation.pdf


3/22

increasingly lag behind demand.Maor technological advancesleading to improved launch capability!ill be needed to achieve the very"rst of #SS$A%&%'Ms obectivesfor the future ( Assured Access to

Space ( !ithout !hich its otherobectives may remain beyond reach.)mprovements to lift capability may be achieved by improving launchand propulsion systems, by reducing the si*e and !eight ofspacecraft and payloads, or by some combination of the t!o. +eavylift !ill be needed inde"nitely for outsi*e cargo, so improvements inengines and propellants continue to be a priority.1n the other hand,as increasingly feer spacecraft can do more from a given orbit and2or livelonger on orbit, replacements are needed less often,hich also reduces relative demand on launch assets.

The advent of reusable launch vehicles 3456s7 ill reduce per unit launchcosts even further. #n parallel, e continue to reduce spacecraft sie and

eight on both a unit and constellation basis. As this miniaturiationapproach enables entire ne classes of small and microsatellites to meetmission utility criteria 3see

Section &87, thespace transportation infrastructureof the future may also include assets thatremain on orbit or are recoverable for reuse.Such space support vehicles could provide orbit-changing andmaintenanceservices, thus potentially reducing the life-cyclecosts of many space systems.

%.&espite this fact ' Investents in Heavy lift Capacity

Technology and &eployent are underfunded

US() severely underfunds investents in ne*t generation heavy lift capacity

:osey 4'' 5Bill :oset6 con!ressman6 posey.house.!ov6 %ill +osey$ ;ashin!ton6 -ar /4


4/22

!ap bet"een Shuttle and its replacement Constellation pro!ram6 but he has sincecancelled the Constellation pro!ram and NASAs latest bud!et proposal cuts billionfrom NASAs next !eneration heavy lift roc,et.Con!ressman :oseys testimony before the House Bud!et Committee can bevie"ed H+(+and a transcript has been provided belo"7

D&han, you -adam Chairman and -embers6 for the opportunity to appear before youthis mornin! and ur!e you to preserve NASAs core mission "hich is human space fli!ht.

D-ore specifically6 I "ould as, that as you proceed in developin! a bud!et resolution thatyou include sufficient fundin! and lan!ua!e directin! NASA to ma,e human space fli!htits hi!hest priority.DOur nation is critically near the tippin! point of cedin! our leadership in spaceexploration for our future !enerations6 as many of you already ,no".D)irection from NASA Administration has been seriously lac,in! "ith respect to their!oals. By failin! to set priorities "ithin NASAs bud!et6 the Administration has leftNASA "ith no priorities.

DAs a result6 human space fli!ht and +xploration are sufferin! and the %.S. "ill be cedin!its leadership in space to China and (ussia.DShould Con!ress fail to step in "here the Administration has left a leadership void "e"ill be ma,in! an unacceptable compromise in our national security and lose economicand intan!ible benefits from our space pro!ram.D&he :resident abandoned the Constellation pro!ram in his bud!et6 callin! for it to becancelled "ith no solid alternative or plan for the future. By so doin!6 he set our humanspace fli!ht pro!ram dan!erously adrift "ith va!ue milestones for the "orlds premierespace exploration or!aniEation.DLast year6 Con!ress and the Administration a!reed on an AuthoriEation Bill that focusedon developin! !oals after the Space Shuttles retirement. &his included plans for a ne"heavy lift capacity "hile !ivin! limited support to commercial operations.D%nfortunately6 the :residents proposed bud!et is a substantial departure from theAuthoriEation Bill that he si!ned into la" in OctoberFcuttin! billion from the heavylift pro!ram "hile increasin! taxpayer subsidies for the lo" earth orbit commercial spacecompanies.D&his cut is in spite of the fact that6 by the Administrations o"n estimate6 the 4'Gtimeline for a return to fli!ht "ould have been unattainable at last years pro3ectedfundin! levels.D&he :residents Bud!et has misplaced prioritiesF!uttin! vital heavy lift capability"hile dealin! si!nificantly li!hter cuts to unrelated pro3ects li,e studyin! climate chan!e.

DIn 2iscal ear 4'46 'GF 'G federal a!encies and departments "ere funded at over billion to address climate chan!e. &here are NO6 Eero6 Eilch6 nada6 NO other a!enciesfunded to pursue human space fli!ht.

0
http://www.youtube.com/congressmanposey#p/u/0/v41Y_LegTS4http://www.youtube.com/congressmanposey#p/u/0/v41Y_LegTS4


5/22

C.HLC is and will continue to be grossly underfunded

US()-ASA underfund Heavy Lift Capacity pro!ects in status /uo and

future funding is not certain

Nextbigfuture.com - /NASA heavy lift roc0et proposed butfaces budget funding challenges, September 1, -,http233nextbigfuture.com3-3-43nasa5heavy5lift5roc0et5proposed5but.html6

NASA announced the development of the Space Launch System ## an advanced heavy#lift launch vehicle.&he ne"heavy#lift launch vehicle "ill cost ' billion6 "ith its first test fli!ht planned for 4'>. It "ill be desi!ned to carry theOrion -ulti#:urpose Cre" $ehicle for transport of cre" and car!o.

I thin, there is very little chance that this vehicle "ill be funded and developed to completion !iven the current bud!etclimate. If it !ets funded no" it "ould have to not !et delayed and have cost overruns and survive throu!h the 4' and4'G elections.

&he ne" roc,et "ill include technolo!y from the Space Shuttles and the Constellation pro!ram6 "hich "as buildin!t"o roc,ets6 Ares I and Ares $6 and it "ill share a resemblance to the Saturn $6 the first roc,et to travel to the moon.

Basically it is a proposal to support the old technolo!y base and le!acy aerospace companies.

&here "as a previous analysis of an evolved space Launch System6 that "ould ta,e until 4/ for the full '/4 ton

advanced system to launchSLS#6 in Au!ust 406 "ould be the debut of the Car!o SLS6 "ith a ne" fairin! and a vehicle hard"are chan!e

possible < as the "inner of the booster competition "ould debut "ith this HL$.

SLS#G < Au!ust 4 < "ould return to the manned confi!uration6 althou!h no mission other than DexplorationJ < Au!ust 4G < a Car!o SLS launch6 "ould see one chan!e to the vehicle6 as the expendable SS-+ < ,no"n asthe (S#+ < "ould be employed on the vehicle6 ta,en over from the exhausted Shuttle SS-+ stoc,. A!ain6 threeen!ines "ould be reKuired6 as much as all of the SLS vehicles "ill be desi!ned to have DspaceJ for five en!ines.

SLS#'' < Au!ust6 4/4 < "ould be the next chan!e6 as the five en!ine core is filled "ith the t"o extra (S#+s6utiliEin! the full core po"er plant.

&his confi!urations debut "ould be a car!o based mission6 follo"ed by a cre"ed mission one year later.

And then6 in Au!ust of 4/6 the evolved SLS is expected to debut ?see ima!e left@6 a!ain based on the same x(S#+driven core6 but this time "ith a full %pper Sta!e6 becomin! the '/4mt HL$. &his debut ?SLS#'/@ "ould be < asexpected < based around a car!o mission.

&here are other cost estimates that !o as hi!h as G. billion to build and operate SLS throu!h 4'. &he / billionestimate to 4 has been criticiEed as unrealistic. Must a simple pro3ection of maintainin! / billion per year to 4/ isG/ billion. iven the history of this ,ind of roc,et development costs to 4/ are more li,ely to be '4#4 billionand there "ould be delays to 4/#40.
http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/09/nasa-heavy-lift-rocket-proposed-but.htmlhttp://nextbigfuture.com/2011/09/nasa-heavy-lift-rocket-proposed-but.htmlhttp://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/sls1.htmlhttp://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2011/07/preliminary-nasa-evolved-sls-vehicle-21-years-away/http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2011/07/preliminary-nasa-evolved-sls-vehicle-21-years-away/http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/asd/2011/09/12/01.xml&headline=NASA%20Sees%20Testing%20SLS%20In%202017%20for%20$18Bhttp://nextbigfuture.com/2011/09/nasa-heavy-lift-rocket-proposed-but.htmlhttp://nextbigfuture.com/2011/09/nasa-heavy-lift-rocket-proposed-but.htmlhttp://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/sls1.htmlhttp://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2011/07/preliminary-nasa-evolved-sls-vehicle-21-years-away/http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2011/07/preliminary-nasa-evolved-sls-vehicle-21-years-away/http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/asd/2011/09/12/01.xml&headline=NASA%20Sees%20Testing%20SLS%20In%202017%20for%20$18B


6/22

D. %ongress set to cut NASA3Spacebudget for "scal -7

Nasa"atch.com 4' 5SeKuestration Impact at NASA7 '.0 billion Cut for 2 4'/6 By

eith Co"in!on September '06 4' >74/ :-. ' Comments6http7**nasa"atch.com*archives*4'*4*seKuestration#i.html9;hite House details automatic cuts6 calls them Pblunt6 indiscriminateP 6&he HillQCuts of approximately ''4 billion are set to ta,e effect in Man. /6 accordin! to an a!reement reached by theadministration and Con!ress6 "ith half of the cuts fallin! on discretionary and non#discretionary defense bud!ets6 and

the other half affectin! non#defense bud!ets.Q%.S. bud!et seKuester cuts science over percent6NatureQNASA "ould lose 0'> million from its science bud!et6 /0G for space operations6 /4 for exploration6 0G forcross a!ency support6 amon! other cuts.QSeKuestration ;ould Cut %.S. Science Bud!ets By .R6 ;hite House +stimates 6 ScienceQNASAPs science pro!rams "ould drop by 0'> million to about 0.> billion6 and its +xploration account "ould fall by/4 million to about /. billion.QSeKuestration report7 +mbassy security cut by ' million 6 Human +ventsQOther alarmin! cuts include '.0 billion in fundin! for NASA ...Q#O-B SeKuestration %pdate (eport to the :resident and Con!ress for 2iscal ear 4'/ 6;hite House#O-B (eport :ursuant to the SeKuestration &ransparency Act of 4' ?:. L. ''#'@6 ;hite House

Observation II. Is HarsAdvantages

Advantage I. 0esource &epletion and 1ars

A.&he earths biosphere "ill inevitably collapse due to increasin! population andresource demands

Caldwell 23

5Moseph eor!e Cald"ell6 DOn Savin! the +nvironment6 and the Inevitability of Nuclear

;ar.J """.foundation.b".44'9The destruction of the planet4s environent and biodiversity ay coincidentally behalted by global war6 but savin! biodiversity or the environment "ill not be the cause of !lobal "ar. Less and

less of nature remains "ith each passin! year of the current Q!lobal peaceQ of !lobal industrialiEation. The longer

global war is delayed$ the less of nature 5species$ biodiversity6 will reain after

its occurrence. &he lar!e human population has been made possible because of access to fossil fuel. &he planet cansupport only a small fraction of its current human population on recurrent solar ener!y ?"hich includes hydroelectric6

biomass6 and "ind po"er@. lobal petroleum and natural !as deposits "ill not be exhausted until about 44 ?and coal

some"hat later@6 so the "orldPs current fossil#fuel#driven economy can hypothetically continue for some time to come. If

G
http://nasawatch.com/archives/2012/09/sequestration-i.htmlhttp://spaceref.net/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=14&id=52http://nasawatch.com/archives/2012/09/sequestration-i.html#commentshttp://nasawatch.com/archives/2012/09/sequestration-i.htmlhttp://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/policy-and-strategy/249599-white-house-outlines-sequestration-plan-to-congress-http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/policy-and-strategy/249599-white-house-outlines-sequestration-plan-to-congress-http://blogs.nature.com/news/2012/09/u-s-budget-sequester-cuts-science-over-8-percent.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+news%2Frss%2Fnewsblog+(News+Blog+-+Blog+Posts)http://blogs.nature.com/news/2012/09/u-s-budget-sequester-cuts-science-over-8-percent.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+news%2Frss%2Fnewsblog+(News+Blog+-+Blog+Posts)http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2012/09/sequestration-would-cut-us-scien.htmlhttps://www.google.com/news?ncl=dwAshKe8nmaCXJMcm5czsfn2IkxTM&q=sequester+NASA&lr=English&hl=enhttp://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/sequestration/sequestration_update_august2012.pdfhttp://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/sequestration/sequestration_update_august2012.pdfhttp://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/sequestration/sequestration_update_august2012.pdfhttp://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/stareport.pdfhttp://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/stareport.pdfhttp://www.foundation.bw/http://www.foundation.bw/http://nasawatch.com/archives/2012/09/sequestration-i.htmlhttp://spaceref.net/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=14&id=52http://nasawatch.com/archives/2012/09/sequestration-i.html#commentshttp://nasawatch.com/archives/2012/09/sequestration-i.htmlhttp://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/policy-and-strategy/249599-white-house-outlines-sequestration-plan-to-congress-http://blogs.nature.com/news/2012/09/u-s-budget-sequester-cuts-science-over-8-percent.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+news%2Frss%2Fnewsblog+(News+Blog+-+Blog+Posts)http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2012/09/sequestration-would-cut-us-scien.htmlhttps://www.google.com/news?ncl=dwAshKe8nmaCXJMcm5czsfn2IkxTM&q=sequester+NASA&lr=English&hl=enhttp://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/sequestration/sequestration_update_august2012.pdfhttp://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/stareport.pdfhttp://www.foundation.bw/


7/22

industriali7ed huan society continues to destroy other species at the current

rate 5estiated 82$222 per year6 until fossil fuels are e*hausted 6 little "ill remain of theplanetPs natural environment as "e ,no" it. -an,ind is hurtlin! to"ard disaster ## the biospherePs and its o"n ## and there isnothin! that "ill be done to stop it. Industrial development has se"n the seeds of its o"n destruction. &he situation is out ofcontrol. &he human population explosion has already occurred6 and the resultant destruction ## first of the environment andthen of industrial society and then6 perhaps6 of the human race itself ## is at hand. -an,ind has chosen its destiny6 and is "ellalon! the path to its realiEation.

production rates of commodities must eKual depreciation rates.

%.0esource 1ars will inevitably lead to the e*tinction of huan#ind

Caldwell 29

5Moseph eor!e Cald"ell6 DA Brief uide to :lanetary -ana!ementJhttp7**""".foundation"ebsite.or!*uide&o:-.htm6 44 S%Eman9

It is believed that current huan civili7ation will destroy itself in a global nuclear

war$or perhaps in some other catastrophic event brought on by an#ind:s e*plodingpopulation?e.!.6 a disease similar to the human immunodeficiency virus ?HI$@6 but more easily transmitted@. It is

intended to establish a inial"regret populationafter that event. The current

planetary syste of governent isbest described as anarchic< it consists of about 44 independentstates6 each strivin! for lar!e populations and hi!h levels of industrial output6 each strivin! to out#produce and out#consumethe other6 re!ardless of conseKuences to the planets biosphere. &he momentum and po"er of the "orlds industrial society is

currently so !reat6 ho"ever6 that there is no point to attepting to establish a inial"

regret population at the present tie. Any attempt to do so no" "ould be ridiculed at best and Kuashed

at "orst. In the wa#e of global nuclear war$ the survivors will see first"hand the

folly of the world:s current way of global industriali7ation$ and they will be

very receptive to a proising alternative. It is at that tie that steps will be

ta#en to establish and aintain a inial"regret population.

C. Internal Lin# " ALL future space e*ploration endeavors rely upon cost"efficient

access to space via HLC$ it:s e*pense hinders all US space developent

$alyn 44G 52erris $alyn6 "riter blo!!er for the )aily os6Space for 4G and 4 # NASA +conomics '4'&ue Man 4/6 44G at 47'0 A- :S&6 http7**""".daily,os.com*story*44G*4'*4/*'>>04*#Space#for#4G#and#4#NASA#+conomics#'4'9

Let me start off by bein! very clear # I am tal,in! about development and coloniEation #not exploration. Also # "hy does it cost so much to !o into space=Let me start off by bein! very clear # I am tal,in! about development and coloniEation #not exploration. &his isnPt about findin! "ater on mars6 or the chemical ma,eup ofcomets and asteroids # althou!h the basic science is "orth"hile. ;hat I am tal,in! aboutfor space development is utiliEin! space to create 3obs for people on earth6 and spacecoloniEation ma,es outer space available for the common man.

>
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/01/03/175740/-Space-for-06-and-08-NASA-Economics-101http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/01/03/175740/-Space-for-06-and-08-NASA-Economics-101http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/01/03/175740/-Space-for-06-and-08-NASA-Economics-101http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/01/03/175740/-Space-for-06-and-08-NASA-Economics-101http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/01/03/175740/-Space-for-06-and-08-NASA-Economics-101http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/01/03/175740/-Space-for-06-and-08-NASA-Economics-101http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/01/03/175740/-Space-for-06-and-08-NASA-Economics-101


8/22

&he act of space coloniEation is not in itself spectacular. It is the ordinary day#to#dayroutine of livin!. It is the point at "hich an avera!e middle class family can afford tomove to a colony located either in a space station or on another planet for an investmentcomparable to purchasin! a home and movin! across a continent "here coloniEation "illbecome routine. Ho"ever6 the philosophy of space coloniEation is a profound affirmation

of humanityPs ability to move beyond the limitations and ris,s of remainin! on +arth.Space coloniEation is as profound as the American (evolution "as to politicalphilosophy and the rise of a mar,et economy.

But6 as has been pointed out6 starry#eyed dreams can cost money. ;hich brin!s us tolaunch costs6 and price per pound to orbit. No"6 as I promised on Sunday6 the currentcost to put ' pound of stuff in orbit6 is bet"een '46444#06 dollars. &his is the ,eyfi!ure to remember. &his is the expense that is holdin! bac, space development andcoloniEation. &he reason cost to orbit is most important is because most of the ener!yreKuired to !o any"here is used up 3ust !ettin! to orbit # compare the siEe of the roc,etthat sent the :athfinder probe "ith the siEe of :athfinder itself. As (obert Heinlein said6

Q!et to lo"#earth orbit and youPre half"ay to any"here in the solar system.Q

&. cheaper HLC Opens up space developent and allows unparalleled

access to Liitless Space resources

$alyn 44G 52erris $alyn6 "riter blo!!er for the )aily os6Space for 4G and 4 # NASA +conomics '4'&ue Man 4/6 44G at 47'0 A- :S&6 http7**""".daily,os.com*story*44G*4'*4/*'>>04*#Space#for#4G#and#4#NASA#+conomics#'4'9

And6 this brin!s us to the structural issues in NASA that has perpetuated the shuttle6 "henit shouldPve been replace many years a!o. &o understand this6 you have to !o furtherbac, into the history of Space &ravel. &he conception of NASA "as very similar to theconception of the Le"is and Clar, expedition. &he un,no"ns "ere so !reat ?basicKuestions of survival@ that there "as no "ay the avera!e person could and "ould face theris,s of the expedition. Hence both the Le"is and Clar, expedition and the ori!inalconcept of NASA "ere !iven a monopoly to proceed the only customer "as the!overnment. &he technolo!y reKuired for space travel is obviously much !reater than thetechnolo!y reKuired by Le"is and Clar,6 but the underlyin! issues of survival "ere thesame. So NASA blaEed a trail into the un,no"n6 and "ere subseKuently the onlycustomer in to"n. If you didnPt !et a NASA contract6 you "ere probably out of business?yes6 you could theoretically !o to the military6 but after '>46 or so6 the concept ofmanned military hard"are in space "as replace "ith unmanned satellites@. And today "esee the result # "e have ' consumer of roc,ets into space6 NASA6 and a rapidly shrin,in!set of companies from "hich to !et roc,ets from # In fact6 earlier this year "e sa" thebe!innin!s of the end result # Loc,heed -artin and Boein! currently tryin! to !etpermission to create a sin!le company for NASA to buy roc,ets from. In other "ords6 "ehave a price fixin! scheme6 and the !overnment has been encoura!in! the price fixin!T;hile you can spin a number conspiracy schemes6 and there is some evidence ofcorruption6 the truth is6 in my honest opinion6 it "as mainly a combination circumstances
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/01/03/175740/-Space-for-06-and-08-NASA-Economics-101http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/01/03/175740/-Space-for-06-and-08-NASA-Economics-101http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/01/03/175740/-Space-for-06-and-08-NASA-Economics-101http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/01/03/175740/-Space-for-06-and-08-NASA-Economics-101http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/01/03/175740/-Space-for-06-and-08-NASA-Economics-101http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/01/03/175740/-Space-for-06-and-08-NASA-Economics-101http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/01/03/175740/-Space-for-06-and-08-NASA-Economics-101


9/22

that came from the un,no"n dan!ers of Space fli!ht. Another "ay of loo,in! at it is thatNASA6 and manned space fli!ht6 suffer from the problems of the planned economy. Andplanned economies almost al"ays suffer severe sta!nation.

It is this monopoly6 on both the producer AN) CONS%-+( ends that ma,es space

expensive6 and beyond the means of the avera!e person. Because6 if "e can address thecost of orbital access6 the limitless resources of space do open up to us. And6 they arelimitless ener!y from the sun6 minerals from asteroids6 3ust to name a fe".

Advantage II is Hegeony

A. Lac# of Heavy Lift Capacity Sacrifices US ilitary leadership in

Space



10/22

D&he :resident abandoned the Constellation pro!ram in his bud!et6 callin! for it to becancelled "ith no solid alternative or plan for the future. By so doin!6 he set our humanspace fli!ht pro!ram dan!erously adrift "ith va!ue milestones for the "orlds premierespace exploration or!aniEation.DLast year6 Con!ress and the Administration a!reed on an AuthoriEation Bill that focused

on developin! !oals after the Space Shuttles retirement. &his included plans for a ne"heavy lift capacity "hile !ivin! limited support to commercial operations.D%nfortunately6 the :residents proposed bud!et is a substantial departure from theAuthoriEation Bill that he si!ned into la" in OctoberFcuttin! billion from the heavylift pro!ram "hile increasin! taxpayer subsidies for the lo" earth orbit commercial spacecompanies.D&his cut is in spite of the fact that6 by the Administrations o"n estimate6 the 4'Gtimeline for a return to fli!ht "ould have been unattainable at last years pro3ectedfundin! levels.;The +resident:s %udget has isplaced priorities


11/22

credit card or "ithdra" cash from the ban,F all satellite lin,ed communications. -ostof the public realiEes the compellin! importance of this and thats "hy I as, you to !ivethis your best consideration.D&han, you for your leadership6 and the opportunity to address you concernin! humanspace fli!ht.J

%. Lac# of leadership causes global war

>agan 2?

5(obert a!an6 is senior associate at the Carne!ie +ndo"ment for International :eaceand senior transatlantic fello" at the erman -arshall 2und.6 D+nd of )reams6 (eturn ofHistory6J Hoover Institution Stanford %niversity6

http7**""".hoover.or!*publications*policy#revie"*article*G'/G6 44>9&he 3ostlin! for status and influence amon! these ambitious nations and "ould#be nations is a second definin! feature of thene" post#Cold ;ar international system. Nationalism in all its forms is bac,6 if it ever "ent a"ay6 and so is internationalcompetition for po"er6 influence6 honor6 and status. American predominance prevents these rivalries from intensifyin! F its

re!ional as "ell as its !lobal predominance. 1ere the United States to diinish its influence in

the re!ions "here it is currently the stron!est po"er6 the other nations would settle disputesas !reat and

lesser po"ers have done in the past7 sometimes throu!h diplomacy and accommodation but often through confrontation

andwarsof varyin! scope6 intensity6 and destructiveness. One novel aspect of such a ultipolar

world is that ost of these powers would possess nuclear weapons. That could

a#e warsbet"een them less li,ely6 or it could

simply ma,e them ore catastrophic. It is easy but also dan!erous to underestimate the role the %nited States

plays in providin! 0 stability in the "orld even as it also disrupts stability. 2or instance6 the United States is the

doinant naval powerevery"here6

such that other nations cannot copete with it

even in their home "aters. They either happily or !rud!in!ly allow the United States -avy to be the

guarantor of international waterways and trade routes$of international access to mar,etsand ra" materials such as oil. +ven "hen the %nited States en!a!es in a "ar6 it is able to play its role as !uardian of the

"ater"ays. In a ore!enuinely ultipolar world$ho"ever6 it would not. -ations would

copete for naval doinanceat least in their o"n re!ions and possibly beyond. Conflict bet"een nations

"ould involve stru!!les on the oceans as "ell as on land. Ared ebargos6 of the ,ind used in ;orld ;ar i andother ma3or conflicts6 "ould disrupt trade flo"s in a "ay that is no" impossible. Such order as exists in the "orld rests notmerely on the !ood"ill of peoples but on a foundation provided by American po"er. +ven the +uropean %nion6 that !reat!eopolitical miracle6 o"es its foundin! to American po"er6 for "ithout it the +uropean nations after ;orld ;ar ii "ould

never have felt secure enou!h to reinte!rate ermany. -ost +uropeans recoil at the thou!ht6 but even today @urope :s

stability depends on the guarantee$ ho"ever distant and one hopes unnecessary6 that the United

Statescould step in to chec, any dan!erous development on the continent. In a!enuinely ultipolar

world$ that would not be possible without renewing the danger of world war. :eople "ho believe !reater eKuality amon! nations "ould be preferable to the present American predominance oftensuccumb to a basic lo!ical fallacy. &hey believe the order the "orld en3oys today exists independently of American po"er.&hey ima!ine that in a "orld "here American po"er "as diminished6 the aspects of international order that they li,e "ouldremain in place. But that s not the "ay it "or,s. International order does not rest on ideas and institutions. It is shaped byconfi!urations of po"er. &he international order "e ,no" today reflects the distribution of po"er in the "orld since ;orld;ar ii6 and especially since the end of the Cold ;ar. A different confi!uration of po"er6 a multipolar "orld in "hich the poles"ere (ussia6 China6 the %nited States6 India6 and +urope6 "ould produce its o"n ,ind of order6 "ith different rules and normsreflectin! the interests of the po"erful states that "ould have a hand in shapin! it. ;ould that international order be animprovement= :erhaps for Bei3in! and -osco" it "ould. But it is doubtful that it "ould suit the tastes of enli!htenmentliberals in the %nited States and +urope. &he current order6 of course6 is not only far from perfect but also offers no !uarantee

''
http://www.hoover.org/publications/policy-review/article/6136http://www.hoover.org/publications/policy-review/article/6136


12/22

a!ainst ma3or conflict amon! the "orld s !reat po"ers. +ven under the umbrella of unipolarity6 re!ional conflicts involvin!

the lar!e po"ers may erupt. 1ar could erupt between China and Taiwanand dra" in both the

%nited States and Mapan. ;ar could erupt bet"een 0ussia and )eorgia6 forcin! the %nited States and its +uropean

allies to decide "hether to intervene or suffer the conseKuences of a (ussian victory. Conflict bet"een India and

+a#istanremains possible6 as does conflict bet"een Iran and Israelor other -iddle +astern states. &hese6 too6

could dra" in other !reat po"ers6 includin! the %nited States. Such conflictsmay be unavoidable no matter "hat

policies the %nited States pursues. But they are ore li#ely to erupt if the United States

wea#ensor "ithdra"s from its positions ofre!ional doinance. &his is especially true in +ast Asia6"here most nations a!ree that a reliable American po"er has a stabiliEin! and pacific effect on the re!ion. &hat is certainlythe vie" of most of China s nei!hbors. But even China6 "hich see,s !radually to supplant the %nited States as the dominant

po"er in the re!ion6 faces the dilemma that an American "ithdra"al could unleash an ambitious6 independent6 nationalistMapan.

C. A-&$ U.S. hegeony reduces any ris# of war

)ray 2

5Colin ray6 DHo" has "ar chan!ed since the end of the cold "ar=6J BN+&6

http7**findarticles.com*p*articles*mi8m4IB(*is8'8/*ai8n'G>04G>*=ta!1contentcol'6449

Lo!ically6 the reverse side of the coin "hich proclaims a trend favorin! political violence internal to states is the claim thatinterstate "arfare is becomin!6 or has become6 a historical curiosity. Steven -etE and (aymond -illen assure us that Qmostarmed conflicts in comin! decades are li,ely to be internal ones.Q ?'@ &hat is probably a safe prediction6 thou!h one mi!htchoose to be troubled by their prudent hed!in! "ith the Kualifier Qmost.Q &heir plausible claim "ould loo, a little different inhindsi!ht "ere it to prove true except for a mere one or t"o interstate nuclear conflicts6 say bet"een India and :a,istan6 or Northorea and the %nited States and its allies. &he same authors also offer the comfortin! 3ud!ment that Qdecisive "ar bet"een ma3or

states is rapidly movin! to"ard historyPs dustbin.Q ?@ It is an attractive claim it is a shame that it is "ron!. 1ar6 let alone

Qdecisive "ar6Q bet"een ma3or states currently is en!oying an off"seasonfor one main reason7 So e*tree is

the ibalance ofmilitary power in favor of the United States thatpotential rivals rule out

policies that ight lead to hostilities"ith the superpo"er. It is fashionable to ar!ue that ma3or interstate "aris yesterdayPs problem##recall that the yesterday in Kuestion is barely ' years in the past##because no" there is nothin! to fi!ht

about and nothin! to be !ained by armed conflict. ;ould that those points "ere true unfortunately they are not. &he menace of

ma3or6 if not necessarily decisive6 interstate war will returnto fri!hten us when!reat#po"er rivals feel

able to challenge Aerican hegeony. If you read &hucydides6 or )onald a!an6 you "ill be reminded ofthe deadly and eternal influence of the triad of motives for "ar7 Qfear6 honor6 and interest.Q ?/@

&. A-&$ hegeony solves -uclear @scalation

1alt 9>

5)r. ;alt is the (obert and (enee Belfer :rofessor of International Affairs at the Mohn 2. ennedy School of overnment atHarvard %niversity. :rofessor ;alt received his doctorate in political science from the %niversity of California6 Ber,eley. Aresearch fello" at Harvard %niversity6 ''


13/22

often punctuated by ma3or "ars and occasionally by all#out stru!!les for he!emony. In the first half of the t"entieth century6 forexample6 !reat#po"er "ars ,illed over ei!hty million people. &oday6 ho"ever6 the dominant position of the %nited States placessi!nificant limits on the possibility of !reat#po"er competition6 for at least t"o reasons. One reason is that because the %nitedStates is currently so far ahead6 other ma3or po"ers are not inclined to challen!e its dominant position. Not only is there no

possibility of a Dhe!emonic "arJ ?because there is no potential he!emon to mount a challen!e@6 but the ris, of "ar via

iscalculation is reduced by theover"helmin! gap between the United States andthe other

a!or powers.-iscalculation is more li,ely to lead to "ar "hen the balance of po"er is fairly even6 because in this

situation both sides can convince themselves that they mi!ht be able to "in. ;hen the balance of po"er is heavily s,e"ed6ho"ever6 the leadin! state does not need to !o to "ar and "ea,er states dare not try. ' NA$AL ;A( COLL++ (+$I+; &hesecond reason is that the continued deployment of rou!hly t"o hundred thousand troops in +urope and in Asia provides a further

barrier to conflict in each re!ion. So lon! as %.S. troops are committed abroad6 re!ional po"ers ,no" that launchin! a "ar isli,ely to lead to a confrontation "ith the %nited States. &hus6 states "ithin these re!ions do not "orry as much about each other6

because the U.S. presenceeffectively prevents regional conflicts fro brea#ing out. ;hatMoseph Moffe has termed the DAmerican pacifierJ is not the only barrier to conflict in +urope and Asia6 but it is an important one.&his tranKuiliEin! effect is not lost on Americas allies in +urope and Asia. &hey resent %.S. dominance and disli,e playin! hostto American troops6 but they also do not "ant D%ncle SamJ to leave. &hus6 %.S. primacy is of benefit to the %nited States6 and toother countries as "ell6 because it dampens the overall level of international insecurity. ;orld politics mi!ht be more interestin! ifthe %nited States "ere "ea,er and if other states "ere forced to compete "ith each othermore actively6 but amore excitin! "orldis not necessarily a better one. A comparatively borin! era may provide fe" opportunities for !enuine heroism6 but it is probably a!ood deal more pleasant to live in than Dinterestin!J decades li,e the '/4s or '04s. :rimacy 2osters :rosperity By facilitatin!the development of a more open and liberal "orld economy6 American primacy also fosters !lobal prosperity. +conomic

interdependence is often said to be a cause of "orld peace6 but it is more accurate to say that peace encourages

interdependenceFby ma,in! it easier for states to accept the potential vulnerabilities of extensive internationalintercourse.'4Investorsare more "illin! to send oney abroad when the danger of war is

reote6 and states "orry less about bein! dependent on others "hen they are not concerned that these connections mi!ht besevered. ;hen states are relatively secure6 they "ill also be less fixated on ho" the !ains from cooperation are distributed. In

particular6 they are less li,ely to "orry that extensive cooperation "ill benefit others more and thereby place them at a relative

disadvanta!e over time.'' By providin! a tranKuil international environment6 in short6 U.S. priacy has created

political conditionsthat are conducive toexpandin! global tradeand investment. Indeed6 American primacy"as a prereKuisite for the creation and !radual expansion of the +uropean %nion6"hich is often touted as a triumph of economicself#interest over historical rivalries. Because the %nited States "as there to protect the +uropeans from the Soviet %nion andfrom each other6 they ;AL& '/ It may not be politically correct to tal, about Den3oyin!J the exercise of po"er6 but most peopleunderstand that it is better to have it than to lac, it. could safely i!nore the balance of po"er "ithin;estern +urope andconcentrate on expandin! their overall level of economic inte!ration. &he expansion of "orld trade has been a ma3or source ofincreased !lobal prosperity6 and %.S. primacy is one of the central pillars upon "hich that system rests.' &he %nited States also

played a leadin! role in establishin! the various institutions that re!ulate and mana!e the "orld economy. As a number ofcommentators have noted6 the current era of D!lobaliEationJ is itself partly an artifact of American po"er.As &homas 2riedman

puts it6 D;ithout America on duty6 there "ill be no America Online.J'/ :rimacy -aximiEes Influence 2inally6 primacy !ivesthe%nited States !reater freedomof action and !reater influence over the entire a!enda of !lobal issues. Because it is lessdependent on other countries6 the %nited States is to a lar!e extent able to set the terms for its participation in many internationalarran!ements. Althou!h cooperatin! "ith others is often in its interest6 the option to D!o it aloneJ !ives the %nited States !reater

bar!ainin! po"er than most ?if not all@ other states.'0 &he %nited States can also choose to stay out of trouble if it "ishesbecause it is ob3ectively very secure6 it can remain aloof frommany of the "orlds problems even "hen it mi!ht be able to play aconstructive role.' et primacy also means that the %nited States can underta,e tas,s that no other state "ould even contemplate

and can do so "ith reasonable hope of success. In the past decade6 for instance $ the United Statesplayed a ,ey role in

!uidin! the reunification of ermany ne!otiated a deal to endNorth oreas nuclear "eapons pro!ram and convinced

U#raine$ >a7a#hstan$ and %elarus to give up the nuclear arsenalsthey had inherited fromtheSoviet%nion. It also rescued the -exican economy durin! the peso crisis in '06 brou!ht three ne" members into the Natoalliance6 defeated and defan!ed IraK in ''6 and ,ept the IraKi re!ime under ti!ht constraints thereafter. &he %nited States also

played an important role in the recovery fromthe Asian financial crisis of '>6 led the coalition that defeated Serbia in the '"ar in osovo6 and used its economic po"er to encoura!e the ouster of Slobodan -ilosevic and his prosecution for alle!ed "ar

crimes. U.S. powerprobably helped preventany number of events that mi!ht have occurred but at this "ritin!

have notFsuch as a direct Chinese challen!e to &ai"an or a nuclear conflict between India and

+a#istan. +ach of these achievements reKuired resources6 and Americas capacity to shape "orld events "ould be muchsmaller "ere its relative po"er to decline. In short6 sayin! that Americans li,e a position of primacy is a,in to sayin! that theyli,e po"er6 and they prefer to have more of it rather than less. It may not be politically correct to tal, about Den3oyin!J theexercise of po"er6 but most '0 NA$AL ;A( COLL++ (+$I+; people understand that it is better to have it than to lac, it.Havin! a !reat deal of po"er may not !uarantee success or safety6 but it certainly improves the odds. One ima!ines6 for example6that Senator &om )aschle li,es bein! ma3ority leader of the %.S. Senate more than he li,ed bein! minority leader6 3ust as onesuspects that -i,hail orbachev6 Boris eltsin6 and no" $ladimir :utin "ould have acted Kuite differently had (ussian ?orSoviet@ po"er not deteriorated so dramatically. &he reason is simpleF"hen one is stron!er6 one can defend ones interests moreeffectively and can more easily prevent others from imposin! their "ill.'G :o"er also !ives people ?or states@ the capacity to

'/


14/22

pursue positive ends6 and a position of primacy maximiEes ones ability to do so. &hus6 anyone "ho thin,s that the %nited Statesshould try to discoura!e the spread of "eapons of mass destruction6 promote human ri!hts6 advance the cause of democracy6 or

pursue any other positive political !oal should reco!niEe that the nations ability to do so rests primarily upon its po"er. &he%nited States "ould accomplish far less if it "ere "ea,er6 and it "ould discover that other states "ere settin! the a!enda of "orld

politics if its o"n po"er "ere to decline. As Harry &ruman put it over fifty years a!o6 D:eace must be built upon po"er6 as "ell as

upon !ood "ill and !ood deeds.J'> &he bottom line is clear. +ven in a world with nuclear weapons6 extensiveeconomic ties6 rapid communications6 an increasin!ly vocal chorus of non!overnmental or!aniEations6 and other such novel

features6 po"er still matters6 and priacy is still preferable. :eople runnin! for president do not declare that theirmain !oal as commander in chief "ould be to move the %nited States into the number#t"o position. &hey understand6 as do mostAmericans6 that bein! number one is a luxury they should try very hard to ,eep.

Advantage III. @conoy

A. HLC -ecessary for US @conoy$ without cost"efficient HLC

econoic benfoits of the space progra will be lost



15/22

we will be a#ing an unacceptable coproise in our national security and lose

econoic and intangible benefits fro our space progra.D&he :resident abandoned the Constellation pro!ram in his bud!et6 callin! for it to becancelled "ith no solid alternative or plan for the future. By so doin!6 he set our humanspace fli!ht pro!ram dan!erously adrift "ith va!ue milestones for the "orlds premiere

space exploration or!aniEation.DLast year6 Con!ress and the Administration a!reed on an AuthoriEation Bill that focusedon developin! !oals after the Space Shuttles retirement. &his included plans for a ne"heavy lift capacity "hile !ivin! limited support to commercial operations.D%nfortunately6 the :residents proposed bud!et is a substantial departure from theAuthoriEation Bill that he si!ned into la" in OctoberFcuttin! billion from the heavylift pro!ram "hile increasin! taxpayer subsidies for the lo" earth orbit commercial spacecompanies.D&his cut is in spite of the fact that6 by the Administrations o"n estimate6 the 4'Gtimeline for a return to fli!ht "ould have been unattainable at last years pro3ectedfundin! levels.

D&he :residents Bud!et has misplaced prioritiesF!uttin! vital heavy lift capability"hile dealin! si!nificantly li!hter cuts to unrelated pro3ects li,e studyin! climate chan!e.

DIn 2iscal ear 4'46 'GF 'G federal a!encies and departments "ere funded at over billion to address climate chan!e. &here are NO6 Eero6 Eilch6 nada6 NO other a!enciesfunded to pursue human space fli!ht.DHuman space fli!ht is a matter of national security. Space is the "orlds military hi!h!round6 our olan Hei!hts if you "ill.DBy cedin! our leadership to other nations such as China6 (ussia6 and India "e "ould beliterally !ivin! them the ultimate military hi!h !round.DChina and (ussia have announced plans to coloniEe the -oonFthey are not !oin! thereto collect and study roc,s li,e "e did. ;1e also ust not lose sight of the a!or asset that the huan space flight

wor#force is to our nation. The wor#force is not a spigot that you can turn on and

off. It has ta#en decades to build and it will evaporate overnight with no progras

in place.

;1ithout a clear vision and a robust investent in our huan space flight progra

the counity will /uic#ly atrophy as these engineers and their e*pertise are lost to

other pursuits and possibly even other countries.

D&he Administration plans to retire the Shuttle pro!ram this summer after over /4 yearsof service7 ferryin! astronauts6 modules6 and components to the International SpaceStation launchin! and repairin! numerous satellites includin! the Hubble launchin!three interplanetary probes and advancin! scientific experimentation includin!micro!ravity researchFall important !oals for this nation.D)espite this incredible list of accomplishments6 "hen Space Shuttle Atlantis touchesdo"n for the final time this summer6 it "ill be more bitter than it "ill be s"eet becausethere is currently no clear vision of the future of Americas human space fli!ht pro!ram.And6 it is a step bac,"ard for American leadership in space.D&he time to refocus NASA on its primary human space fli!ht mission is no". &heBud!et Committee has the authority to re3ect the Administrations continued efforts to

'


16/22

reshape NASA as yet another a!ency "ithout a clear focusF"ithout a clear mission.DMust ima!ine one day "ithout your cell phones6 one day "ithout your laptops6 one day"ithout a "eather report6 one day "ithout your :S6 one day not bein! able to use yourcredit card or "ithdra" cash from the ban,F all satellite lin,ed communications. -ostof the public realiEes the compellin! importance of this and thats "hy I as, you to !ive

this your best consideration.D&han, you for your leadership6 and the opportunity to address you concernin! humanspace fli!ht.J

%. @conoic decline breeds world wars

=ead 9#B5;alter (ussell -ead6QHenry A. issin!er senior fello" for Q%.S. forei!n policy at the Council on 2orei!n (elations6 *0*446&he Ne" (epublic6 DOnly -a,es ou Stron!er6J9

So far6 such half#hearted experiments not only have failed to "or, they have left the societies that have tried them in apro!ressively "orse position6 farther behind the front#runners as time !oes by. Ar!entina has lost !round to Chile (ussiandevelopment has fallen farther behind that of the Baltic states and Central +urope. 2reKuently6 the crisis has "ea,ened the

po"er of the merchants6 industrialists6 financiers6 and professionals "ho "ant to develop a liberal capitalist society inte!rated

into the "orld. Crisis can also stren!then the hand of reli!ious extremists6 populistradicals6 or authoritarian traditionalists "ho are determined to resist liberal capitalist society for a variety ofreasons. -ean"hile6 the companies and ban,s based in these societies are often less established and more vulnerable to theconseKuences of a financial crisis than more established firms in "ealthier societies. As a result6 developin! countries andcountries "here capitalism has relatively recent and shallo" roots tend to suffer !reater economic and political dama!e "hencrisis stri,es##as6 inevitably6 it does. And6 conseKuently6 financial crises often reinforce rather than challen!e the !lobaldistribution of po"er and "ealth. &his may be happenin! yet a!ain. None of "hich means that "e can 3ust sit bac, and en3oythe recession. History may su!!est that financial crises actually help capitalist !reat po"ers maintain their leads##but it hasother6 less reassurin! messa!es as "ell. If financial crises have been a normal part of life durin! the /44#year rise of the liberal

capitalist system under the An!lophone po"ers6 so has "ar.&he "ars of the Lea!ue of Au!sbur! and theSpanish Succession the Seven ears ;ar the American (evolution the Napoleonic ;arsthe t"o ;orld ;ars the cold "ar7 &he list of "ars is almost as lon! as the list of financialcrises. Bad economic times can breed "ars. +urope "as a pretty peaceful place in '6 butthe )epression poisoned erman public opinion and helped brin! Adolf Hitler to po"er. Ifthe current crisis turns into a depression6 "hat rou!h beasts mi!ht start slouchin! to"ard-osco"6 arachi6 Bei3in!6 or Ne" )elhi to be born= &he %nited States may not6 yet6 decline6 but6 if "ecanPt !et the "orld economy bac, on trac,6 "e may still have to fi!ht.

C. )lobal econoic crisis causes war"""strong statistical support"""their ev doesn:t

account for global crises

0oyal$ &irector of Cooperative Threat 0eduction at &O&$ 32

5Medediah )irector of Cooperative &hreat (eduction at the %.S. )epartment of )efense64'46 D+conomic Inte!ration6 +conomic Si!nalin! and the :roblem of +conomic Crises6Jin +conomics of ;ar and :eace7 +conomic6 Le!al and :olitical :erspectives6 ed.oldsmith and Brauer6 p. '/#'9

'G


17/22

Less intuitive is ho" periods of economic decline may increase the li,elihood of externalconflict. :olitical science literature has contributed a moderate de!ree of attention to the impact of economic decline and thesecurity and defence behaviour of interdependent stales. (esearch in this vein has been considered at systemic6 dyadic and nationallevels. Several notable contributions follo". 2irst6 on the systemic level. :ollins ?44' advances -odcls,i and &hompsonPs ?'G@

"or, on leadership cycle theory6 findin! that rhythms in the !lobal economy are associated "ith the riseand fall of a pre#eminent po"er and the often bloody transition from one pre#eminent

leader to the next. As such6 exo!enous shoc,s such as economic crises could usher in aredistribution of relative po"er?see also ilpin. 'SM@ that leads to uncertainty about po"erbalances6 increasin! the ris, of miscalculation?2caron. '@. Alternatively6 even a relativelycertain redistribution of po"er could lead to a permissive environment for conflict as arisin! po"er may see, to challen!e a declinin! po"er?;erner. '@. Separately. :ollins ?'G@ alsosho"s that !lobal economic cycles combined "ith parallel leadership cycles impact the li,elihood of conflict amon! ma3or6 mediumand small po"ers6 althou!h he su!!ests that the causes and connections bet"een !lobal economic conditions and security conditionsremain un,no"n. Second6 on a dyadic level. CopelandPs ?'G. 444@ theory of trade expectations su!!ests that Pfuture expectation oftradeP is a si!nificant variable in understandin! economic conditions and security behaviour of states. He ar!ues that interdependent

states arc li,ely to !ain pacific benefits from trade so lon! as they have an optimistic vie" of future trade relations. Ho"ever6 if theexpectations of future trade decline6particularly for difficult to replace items such asener!y resources6 the li,elihood for conflict increases6 as states "ill be inclined to use

force to !ain access to those resources . Crises could potentially be the tri!!er for decreased trade expectationseither on its o"n or because it tri!!ers protectionist moves by interdependent states.0 &hird6 othershave considered thelin, bet"een economic decline and external armed conflict at a national level. -om ber! andHess?44@ find a stron! correlation bet"een internal conflict and external conflict6particularly durin! periods of economic do"nturn. &hey "rite. &he lin,a!e6 bet"een internaland external conflict and prosperity are stron! and mutually reinforcin! . +conomicconflict lends to spa"n internal conflict6 "hich in turn returns the favour. -oreover6 thepresence of a recession tends to amplify the extent to "hich international and externalconflicts self#reinforce each other?Hlomhen= U Hess. ?'4. p. VW +conomic decline has also beenlin,ed "ith an increase in the li,elihood of terrorism?Blombcr!. Hess. U ;ee ra pan a6 440@. "hichhas the capacity to spill across borders and lead to external tensions . 2urthermore6 crises!enerally reduce the popularity of a sittin! !overnment . Q)iversionary theoryQ su!!eststhat6 "hen facin! unpopularity arisin! from economic decline6 sittin! !overnments haveincreased incentives to fabricate external military conflicts to create a Prally around thefla!P effect. ;an! ?'G@6 )c(oucn ?'@6 and Blombcr!. Hess6 and &hac,er ?44G@ find supportin! evidence sho"in! thateconomic decline and use of force arc at least indirecti@ correlated. elpi ?'>@. -iller ?'@. and isan!ani and :ic,erin! ?44@su!!est that Ihe tendency to"ards diversionary tactics arc !reater for democratic states than autocratic states6 due to the fact thatdemocratic leaders are !enerally more susceptible to bein! removed from office due to lac, of domestic support. )e(ouen ?444@ has

provided evidence sho"in! that periods of "ea, economic performance in the %nited States6 and thus "ea, :residential popularity6

are statistically lin,ed lo an increase in the use of force. In summary6 rcccni economic scholarship positivelycorrelates economic inte!ration "ith an increase in the freKuency of economic crises 6"hereas political science scholarship lin,s economic decline "ith external conflict alsystemic6 dyadic and national levels.P &his implied connection bet"een inte!ration6 crises and armed conflict has not featured

prominently in the economic#security debate and deserves more attention.&his observation is not contradictory to otherperspectives

that lin, economic interdependence "ith a decrease in the li,elihood of external conflict6such as those mentioned in the first para!raph of this chapter. &hose studies tend to focus on dyadic interdependenceinstead of !lobal interdependenceand do not specifically consider the occurrence of andconditions created byeconomic crises. As such6 the vie" presented here should be considered ancillary to those vie"s.

'>


18/22

Advantage I. Asteroid Collision

A. Inevitably an Asteroid will stri#e the planet$ resulting in an

e*tinction"level event

8randenburg - /9ohn &. 8randenburg $h.D., )octor "randenburg as born in4ouchester Minnesota but gre up in Medford 1regon. 9e obtained a "A in :hysics from Southern 1regon/niversity in Ashland 1regon, home of the Sha'espearean Festival. 9e obtained his MS in Applied Scienceat /niversity of alifornia at )avis and his :h) in Theoretical :lasma :hysics at the / )avis extensioncampus at 5arence 5ivermore National 5aboratory in 5ivermore alifornia. The Title of his Thesis as ;ATheoretical Model of a 4eversed Field #on 5ayer Made of Monoenergetic #ons< and dealt ith the magneticcon(nement of plasmas for controlled nuclear fusion. #nspired by the Apollo missions to choose a career in:hysics he has alays been an avid fan of space exploration and science (ction. 9e is the author the;)ead Mars, )ying =arth>>7 ith Monica 4ix :axson , 3 see Amaon.com7 hich dealt ith theproblems of energy and global arming from a comparative planetary science 3 =arth-Mars7 perspectiveand has been published the /SA, ?reat "ritain, ?ermany and @apan. #t as the inner of the Silver Medal

in the "en Fran'lin aards for boo's on science and environment. 9e has published to science (ctionnovels* ;Asteroid 8%-8%&8 Sepulveda< and its se!uel ;Morningstar :ass, The ollapse of the /F1 overup>7 ith Monica 4ix :axson , 3 see Amaon.com7 hich dealt ith theproblems of energy and global arming from a comparative planetary science 3 =arth-Mars7 perspectiveand has been published the /SA, ?reat "ritain, ?ermany and @apan. #t as the inner of the Silver Medalin the "en Fran'lin aards for boo's on science and environment. 9e has published to science (ctionnovels* ;Asteroid 8%-8%&8 Sepulveda< and its se!uel ;Morningstar :ass, The ollapse of the /F1 overup

Documents

Space Insfrastructure AFF 3.0 (3)