her. chasing a dream party. just join us very well welcome this is all at sea life here in the russian capital with twenty four hours a day the top stories now this hour a finnish pastor pulls out of favor with his church and his government lashing out at the terrorist web site hosted by finland. has been at the front and he's facing criminal charges for inciting racial hatred he maintains he's a victim and he's even received death threats from russia's number one terrorist. and. the world's emerging super powers pledge their commitment to

a new global economy and call on the nato led coalition to play by the rules in libya has been convicted says the u.n. has some explaining to do about how its resolutions on libya and ivory coast of being implemented. and the u.s. is accused of manipulating regime change in the arab world through. all of the guise of democratic revolution setting up an all new online accounts meeting for western intervention in libya maybe just one of the tricks of the cia's sleep. probably about with more stories one of them and that's a hot enough not to me time will space peaceful or will it be the same for us in the north the second part of our special report that's coming up next here on our team. thirty eight. trying to do it all.

at present it is not known if weapons capable of striking targets on earth are 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 the 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 strike. in two thousand and eight fifty million dollars was allocated to project supersonic plane capable of reaching any point on the

globe in only a few minutes and drop up to six tons of bombs. orbiting space satellites that would actually have missiles on it that could be fired from space and reach a target in literally five to ten minutes as opposed to the current thirty minutes . military doctrine also for seize deploying batteries of missiles the door but the planet striking at over seven thousand miles an hour these projectiles would be capable of making out simultaneously to one hundred targets on the ground with the destructive power of a nuclear device. identify a target through overhead imagery process communications between military decision makers and then precisely enough to destroy the target with one shot. would it really be that big a step if the projectile itself were also known from space there's no practical difference and i'd venture 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 pink bombs smart bombs are hitting the targets we know from afghanistan and iraq alone in the last few years but that's a fallacy you aren't seeing civilian people you are not seizing the iraqi bases what you are doing is was how much worse would the probability of hitting the wrong target for 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 god knows where you know that that's a reality and if if we don't accept that we just whistling in the dark and we're going to be victims of our own technology. that 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 tak us with nuclear weapons we've got to have a 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 to this 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 offices 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 project launch we have reconnaissance and surveillance satellites that can detect all these we detected the chinese test for example in fact we detected 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 a we're the united states intention to dominate space by doing so china also show the united states that any orbiting weapon can be shot down. we wouldn't really want to see in the future and the surrounded by all to lay out weapons which will make many kinds even more vulnerable than the season today.

at the united nations china with many other nations has since the 1980's and trying to expand a 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 two one united states is the only nation actually voted against this were isolated on this issue. while we john is 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 strategic independence and space because they can service account away but from a a us view point it would seem to me that you would want your allies integrated into your system. to flick of russia dollar by the european military should equip itself with a wider array of military space systems in support of telecommunications navigation and information for ground troops from disorganized there are only as i thought. so we don't have them which certainly weakens the european armed forces to poland and nato makes them very dependent on the american spirit. is going to what does one need when one isn't gauged in a military. in europe or more precisely in france. because let me tell you europe does not yet exist in

a military sense. and the europeans still rely on the american g.p.s. . during periods of diplomatic tension to the american be denied by its own. right russia and china europe is developing its own 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 you're a strategic thinker you certainly do not want to be terrifying your allies that's the way 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 back away from that because we're actually creating negative consequences and more spurring other

people to do things that will challenge us in space. for a number of decades the united states has been pursuing a military doctrine of space control. however even without a treaty in place in space the u.s. congress alone could apply the brakes to such developments it would be nice to think that space weaponization is prevented not because there's a huge outcry against it although that would be an interesting prospect too because no one including our own nation has the money to spend on this anymore 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. it's really him saying oh we are willing to spend hundreds of millions 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 lead. we could go on it wouldn't be easy it would be a very difficult thing to do but it could be done. we're. going to treaty ban all anti-satellite weaponry and ground based lasers conventional missiles and most orbiting systems can be used to destroy satellites. could literally guarantee that kill vehicles with only carded missiles not satellites or burst down objects. components of a new treaty argue such concepts are untenable interrelate. weaponization of space has 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 will be 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 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 i'm 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 barack obama's election got tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending cut investments in other

proven missile defense systems. weaponize space. 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 or is based capabilities. by. the air force account in colorado springs for the doctrine of space control and its possible consequences.

it's hard to change space period already without attacking so i'm afraid that if we want space superiority we're going to have to attack and resistance which i don't know if you know much about all mechanics but if you created debris and space that would just be in the way for you as well and it kind of start 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 junk is so high that nasa is worried that if there is never another watch of

anything into space it has every launch creates a little bit of debris. in fifty years time. certain orbits will be still polluted that nobody can operate there because the stuff that's already out there will start breaking up and creating more and more. as satellites destruction unleashes a storm cloud of debris that founds outer space and threatens everything in orbit. the point really is a 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 out. 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 the 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 voters space i'm talking about weather satellites positioning satellites. for scientific satellites 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 a jeopardy if we start putting weapons in outer space would our world change if we lost the use. satellites they want six fifteen am communication 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 universal standard time the synchronization of nasa infrastructure has failed 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 are sucked from the industries and businesses triggering a financial crash new services are crippled city streets relying on g.p.s. for traffic management are in chaos electrical grids are destructive winds known as of continents are blinded by blackouts. coastguards are deaf to shifts distress

calls. dozens of aircrafts are missing air traffic controllers are fighting panic worldwide flights are grounded or called back by midnight there's been a cascade of traffic trained both in the aircraft accidents. so far a world is awarded such a catastrophe. but a space war would kill satellites and blast tons of wreckage into orbit. the system we rely on would shatter and the impossible to restore. every nation would suffer the consequences of armed conflict in space still some maintain that being the first to place weapons in space remains the best option a say the 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 may be rapidly closing where devices could dominate space to search for where there would be no arms race frankly and i think it's doable i

think the march of technology will mean that even if we get a lead on other nations in attempting to do that sooner or later. we will again be challenged it's kind of like what happened at the world war two we have the atomic bomb nobody else ever gives our mc bomb we thought we had a bigger explosive and with our tomic weaponry. we would be able to dominate the earth that didn't last very long the soviets out of the topic on the chinese side on its own. 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 weaponized days is a dangerous idea and that old problems other countries took also to develop space weapons. india has been discussing whether or not it needs to build its own

and. you can be sure if 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 a domino that some nations would yield to american domination others would attempt to counter the united states and contest the control of space by a single superpower all nations most stable and unstable will be dragged into a new arms race. the european union has been up until now opposed to the weaponization of space. but for how much longer seen as a man if the us continues to develop not only military satellites but also space based weapons who will have to think about it and find ways to defend ourselves from them american threats and the arms race that it would trigger the ground the quick. russia has declared that if the united states goes on pursuing its doctrine

it will have no choice but to destroy all ordered threats. if americans deploy. faith based antibodies to trial defenses then could you imagine interceptor based on sprays stations community stations would longer fly thirty toward the. northeast orioles will try and not their food because she did it as a quite unexpected well as she russian. seriously were in the privacy of star wars is no longer a fantasy it is a reality for the good of course such a policy is a catalyst of an arms race you wouldn't. need the domination of

a factor of force is nourishing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction muscle which there isn't. going to do that it will since in russia's opinion more of the militarization of outer space unpredictable consequences for the international community he could provoke nothing less than the beginning of a new nuclear era. besides the negative environmental impacts and now the space policy of space domination could also have a destabilizing effect on earth. weaponize ation of space could be the trigger that unleashes nuclear war. czar any anxiety and just by putting weapons in space or launching weapons from space downed worth. cording juries by accident by human fallibility by design by terrorist take are the a launching of up to nine thousand hydrogen bombs in using short

ice age and the death of my screeches on the planet. we're on the edge of the nuclear precipice about. the military use of space seems inevitable the rapidly evolving technology and the lack of a strong treating these the door opened to the most bellicose the instincts and space. every year the air force academy and since most brilliant graduates from 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 that 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 a better response weaponization is the most critical debate for the next century and we are on the verge. of making decisions and nations around the world about which path to choose.

more news today violence is once again flared up. these are the images the world has been seeing from the streets of canada. trying to corporations are today.