it's not like. the market. can find out what's really happening to the global economy for a no holds barred look at the global financial headline news you guys are reporting on are. you watching r t time for a look at the headlines. but there is some moans the victims of monday's terror plots that tore through the capital metro killing twelve injuring more than two hundred people the first funerals will take place today and it. says it's not just colonel gadhafi and the rebels to blame for the situation spiraling out of control libya the coalition forces to russian president who said

touched next to his place for the kremlin to talk to journalists ahead of his official visit to china. and american taxpayers are forced to stump up more than any other country in the world on oftentimes a new template to health care and education this year alone the u.s. is planning to spend around seven hundred billion dollars on its military machine. will space remain peaceful would it be vindication for a new arms race with a special report from that's coming up next target. thirty eight. to go to go. at present it is not known if it's capable of striking targets on earth or already deployed in space however orbiting assault systems are being researched. the u.s.

military is developing what the air force in particular has called prompt global strike that is basically currently we have nuclear missiles that could strike anywhere on earth within thirty minutes. what the military is talking about is a similar conventional capability that could be used to knock out say a chinese anti-satellite weapons launcher in a matter of minutes. a number of concepts are being studied with this notion of prompt lobel strike. in two thousand and eight fifty million dollars was allocated to project a supersonic plane capable of reaching any point on the globe in only a few minutes and drop up to six times a bombs. orbiting space satellite that would actually have

missiles on it that could be fired from space and reach a target in literally to ten minutes as opposed to the current thirty minutes. military doctrine also for seize deploying batteries of missiles that orbit the planet striking at over seven thousand miles an hour these projectiles will be capable of wiping out simultaneously to one hundred targets on the ground with the destructive power of a nuclear device. can identify a target through overhead imagery process communications about the target between military decision makers and then guided bomb precisely enough to destroy the target with one shot. would it really be that big a step for projectile itself were also known from space there's no practical difference and i'm going to have to say that the person on the receiving end wouldn't see the distinction either.

with all our technology we know bloody well that we cannot be assured absolutely one hundred percent that our bombs so-called think bombs smart bombs are hitting the target we know from afghanistan and iraq alone in the last few years that you know that's a fallacy you ought to think civilian people you are not seizing the right he bases what you are doing is wrong how much worse with the probability of hitting the wrong target or hitting ourselves from outer space would be we have no way of calculating that it's not possible. at least one weapon could go right and land in iowa or new york city or got nowhere you know that that's

a reality and if if we don't accept that we're just whistling in the dark and we're going to be victims of our own technology. is. moving the arms race into space will be the largest industrial project in the history of the planet earth they can't take any chances they have to have an enemy they have to make the people afraid someone's going to attack us with nuclear weapons we've got to have missile defense in order to protect us from attack iraq. one of the rogue states iran north korea and now they throw china into that equation. for the last three years the pentagon has been trying to make china the new bogeyman and china unwittingly played into the united states

hands with its anti-satellite test. according to some experts this anti-satellite test didn't come as a surprise to american officials. at the time i was at a conference in colorado springs and the military officers in the room actually left to watch the test in real time. so they were observing the actual chinese and the satellite as we know about every space launch we know about every product launch we have reconnaissance and surveillance satellites second detect all these we detected the chinese test for example in fact we detected to two previous chinese tests that failed so we know about this it's extremely difficult to hide this space tests they're one of the most observable weapons tests you can possibly imagine.

everything indicates that china's anti-satellite test was intended to make the world aware of the united states intention to dominate space by doing so is china also show the united states and the orbiting weapon can be shut down. we wouldn't really want to see in the future and surrounded by all to lay out weapons which will made many times even more vulnerable than the situation today. at the united nations china with many other nations has since the 1980's been trying to expand the nine hundred sixty seven outer space treaty. presently the

treaty prohibits placing nuclear weapons in space but doesn't prohibit conventional weapons. each year this design meant initiative is rejected by the united states. it is hundred sixty two one hundred seventy one united states is the only nation actually voted against this were isolated on this issue. while we try. pushed our allies into consideration of more strategic independence from the united states in space and some people would argue perhaps in europe that that's a good thing maybe it's better that europe has a dziedzic independence in space because they can serve as a counterweight but from a a u.s. view point it would seem to me that you would want your allies integrated into your

system. into play of russia dollar for the european military it should equip itself with a wider array of military space systems in support of telecommunications navigation and information for ground troops us through this or that sort of there are only as i thought. we don't have them which certainly weakens the european armed forces credit and in nato makes them very dependent on the american spirit. is going to what does one need when one isn't gauged in a military. aberration in europe or more precisely in france or in britain because let me tell you europe does not yet exist in a military sense. and the only europeans still rely on the american g.p.s. . during periods of diplomatic tension access to the american g.p.s.

can be denied by its own. like russia and china europe is developing its own global navigation satellite alternative known as the galileo system. you create enemies you terrify your friends and you really didn't mean to do that was not what you know if if you're a strategic thinker you certainly do not want to be terrifying your allies that's what it could for you to go and you don't want to be provoking your enemies into taking actions to counter you. so i think we've stepped way over the rhetorical line here. in the united states anyway and we have to figure out how to to back away from that because we're actually creating negative consequences and more spurring other people to do things that will challenge us and this.

for a number of decades the united states has been pursuing a military doctrine of space control however even without a treaty in place granny weapons in space the u.s. congress alone could apply the brakes to such developments it would be nice to think that space weaponization is preventive not because there's a huge outcry against it although that would be an interesting prospect to put because no one including our own nation has the money to spend on this anymore but in an era when the united states still maintains a five hundred billion dollar military budget every year i don't think we can count on. that happens it's really insane now we are willing to spend hundreds of billions of dollars over the years to develop space control means that a treaty would take care of would make unnecessary if we had the world to negotiate such a treaty if we took a read. we could get one it wouldn't be easy it would be

a very difficult thing to do but it could be done. we're. going to treaty and all anti-satellite weaponry and ground based lasers conventional missiles and most orbiting systems can be used to destroy satellites. could a treaty guarantee that kill vehicles would only target missiles not satellites or earth down objects. and. components of a new treaty argue such promises run tenable and too late. for. weaponization of space as happened a long time ago. this idea that it's a pristine environment that if only we stop where we are right now. all will be well it is simply nonsense for certain experts

a wider range of international understandings open needed to guarantee the peaceful uses of space we do indeed need a united nations treaty this is not enough this is only step one step two says ok space has been militarized there are military networks in space and many of them like g.p.s. are useful but we should work on international treaties to make those military space networks used for multilateral purposes do i think that's going to happen and very doubtful but i have to keep hoping and believing that there is a prospect for that. those fearing the weaponization of space could find hope in iraq obama's election got tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending cut investments in other proven missile defense systems will not weaponize face.

as soon as he took office the white house announced that it would be seeking a worldwide ban on weapons that interfere with military and commercial satellites. however it proved difficult to change decades of entrenched military policy and programs to weaponize space. history suggests that nations do not voluntarily disarm they disarm because they're defeated or they make small adjustments in the way they buy and build and deploy their weapons but no superpower says you know it would be better if we were weaker i don't recall that ever happening.

obama went on to allocate billions of dollars for a full range of space control systems including a program called offensive counter space. the pentagon define this new program as offensive measures to disrupt. degrade or destroy any adverse rees face capabilities. ok. the air force academy in colorado springs for the doctrine of space control and its possible consequences are study. is hard to tame space period already without attacking so i'm afraid that if we want space appear you already

we're going to have to attack and resistance which i don't know if you know much about oral mechanics but if you created debris up in space that was just in the way for you as well and it kind of started chain reaction and pretty soon you just have a cloud of debris surrounding earth. about six hundred thousand fragments flying through space at ten times the velocity of a rifle bullet. all these objects are traveling at fourteen thousand miles an hour so even an object the size of a pea traveling at that speed has more force than a. cannonball. right now the problem with space is so high that nasa is worried that if there is never a now there are watch of anything into space it is every launch creates a little bit of debris. in fifty years time. certain orbits will be

so polluted that nobody can operate there because the stuff that's already out there will start breaking up and creating more and more clutter. and satellites destruction unleashes a storm cloud of debris that founds out of space and threatens everything in orbit . the point really is creation of debris in this manner a good idea or bad idea and clearly it is a very bad idea because there is no way to go up and clean that up. the more times you go into space and you begin to practice destroying other satellites you create so much space junk that you literally create a very likely possibility that at some point in time you will not be able to get a rocket off the planet earth because it'll be like a minefield around the planet and you won't be able to escape the minefield with

that rocket because it would be destroyed by all the space junk there so we've got to begin to look at space as an environment. we have several hundred billion dollars of investment in the peaceful uses of outer space i'm talking about weather satellites positioning satellites. a scientific sound. the entire world communication network is all satellite oriented. all this incredible investment from the united states and from the european union and canada other countries like this all this is completely in jeopardy if we start putting weapons in outer space how would our world change if we lost the use. satellites they want six fifteen am

communications satellites hovering over the americas fall mute over a swath of the globe with g.p.s. coverage collapses atomic clocks on g.p.s. satellites can transmit university standard time a synchronization of nasa infrastructures fail. three hundred fifty million cellphones are disabled. hundreds of millions of internet connections vanish around the world card payments and bank accounts freeze billions of dollars or start from the industries and businesses triggering a financial crash news services are crippled city streets relying on g.p.s. for traffic management are in chaos electrical grids are destructive winds own zero cottons are blinded by blackouts. coastguards are deaf the ship's distress calls. dozens of aircrafts are missing air traffic controllers are fighting a panic worldwide flights are grounded for call back by midnight there's been

a cascade of traffic crane both in the aircraft accidents. so far the world was awarded such a catastrophe. for the space war would kill satellites and blast tons of wreckage and it were a bit the system we rely on will shatter and be impossible to restore. every nation would suffer the consequences of armed conflict in space still some maintain that being a first place weapons in space remains the best of off. it time six twenty five and this is especially as part of the conference on world affairs we're discussing the militarization of space there is a point in time that maybe rapidly closing organizes a dominates those discussions or where there would be no arms race frankly i don't think it's doable i think in march of technology will mean that even if we get a lead on other nations in attempting to do not sooner or later. we will again be

challenged it's kind of like what happened there to world war two we had the atomic bomb nobody else out of your comic on the top we had a bigger explosive and with our comic weaponry. we would be able to dominate the earth couldn't last very long or soviets out of atomic bomb the chinese settlements are. likewise a space to think that we can move up there with weaponry and be allowed to be the king on. the throne of space is a tragic miscalculation. everybody thinks that weaponize in space is a dangerous idea that will prompt other countries to also develop space weapons. india has been discussing whether or not it needs to build its own weapons you can be sure india does it pakistan will be thinking about it in a heartbeat as well israel has also been discussing this issue so what you see now

is a potential for domino. some nations would yield to american domination others wouldn't attempt to counter the united states think and cast the control of space by a single superpower all nations stable and unstable would be dragged into a new arms race. the european union have been up until now opposed to the weaponization of space. but for how much longer series immunity for the us continues to develop not only military satellites but also space based weapons will have to think about it and find ways to defend ourselves from them merican threat and the arms race that it would trigger and will in the. russia has declared that if the united states goes on pursuing its doctrine they will have no choice but to destroy all orbiting threats. if americans deploy. phase based antibodies the trial defenses then could you imagine interceptors

based on space stations military stations would longer fly very thorough he or thirty three year old school try and not their food because he did it as a quiet gun except the rotation course russian. seriously wouldn't that is because star wars is no longer a fantasy it is a reality to give of course such a policy is a catalyst of an arms race you would. demean you dumb a nation of the factor of force is nourishing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction my solution. it is not so cool since in russia's opinion one of the militarization of outer space could have unpredictable consequences for the

international community you could provoke nothing less than the beginning of a new nuclear era. besides the negative environmental impacts in outer space the policy of space domination could also have a destabilizing effect on earth. who recognize ation of space could be the trigger that unleashes nuclear war. signy anxiety induced by putting weapons in space or launching weapons from space downs worth. cording just by accident by human fallibility by terrorists now launching up to nine thousand hydrogen bombs inducing a short ice age in an adjacent my screeches on the planet. well in the age of the nuclear precipice about in our nation.

the military use of space seems inevitable the rabidly evolving technology and the lack of a strong treaty these the door opened to the most bellicose instincts and space. every year the air force academy adds its most brilliant graduates to the ranks of the masters of spades the chances for preserving outer space for peaceful ends remains the challenge of the world at large usually we're trying to bring back weapon systems after they've been deployed nuclear missiles we're trying to bring them back here's an opportunity one of the first times in history actually it we have a chance to be proactive we have a chance to stop a new arms race before it actually happens that's why this moment is so crucial.

that debate over space weaponization is the most critical debate for the next century and we are on the verge. of making decisions and may nations around the world about which path to choose.

culture is that so much a lot of people at muriel that little. difference of brazil russia china india and south africa their playing is simple be an alternative to a western centric world is the. wealthy british style.

market. and what's really happening to the global economy for a no holds barred look at the global financial headline is to cause a report on our.