these are the images and seeing from the streets of canada. trying to corporations are rooted a. coup. broadcasting live from our studios in central moscow this is our g eight like i do with us now to the week's top stories right here on ars. a bomb attack on the metro system in the belorussian capital minutes kills thirteen and injures over two hundred president lukashenko announced that five people have been detained but as of yet the motive of the attack is unknown. poisonous intervention that nato is accused of endangering civilians in libya by using depleted uranium shells against gadhafi forces the weapons are thought to have long term residual effects including

the birth defects and cancer. the man the behind an extremist web page that promotes terrorism against russia goes on trial in finland for smuggling chechens into the country but not for his support of moscow's most wanted terrorists earlier a finnish priest was defrocked prosecuted for inciting racial hatred after he gave an interview to archie where he spoke out against the website. up next we'll look at what might trigger a new star wars space race and what the consequences might be. thirty eight. to go. at present it is not known if weapons capable of striking targets on earth are

already deployed in space however orbiting insult 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 a prompt 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 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 to ten minutes as opposed to the current thirty minutes. military doctrine also for seize deploying batteries of missiles the door with the planet striking at over seven thousand miles an hour these projectiles would be capable of pointing 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 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 a for projectile itself were also launched from space there's no practical difference and i don't 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 targets we know from afghanistan and iraq alone in the last few years that if that's a fallacy you ought to think civilian people you are not think they are right he bases what you are doing is one how much worse would 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 god knows where you know. 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. and has said 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 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 project launch we have reconnaissance and surveillance satellites that can detect all these we detected the chinese test for example and 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 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 surrounded by ultimately weapons which will make 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 a hundred sixty to one hundred seventy one united states is the only nation actually voted against this were isolated on this issue. what we thought 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 your pastor teach it independence and space because they can serve as a counterweight but from a a u.s.

viewpoint it would seem to me that you would want your allies integrated into your system. or do what of dollars by the european model train equip itself with a wider array of military space systems in support of telecommunications navigation and information for ground troops. there are only. so we don't have them which certainly weakens the european armed forces and in nato makes them very dependent on the american spirit. is going to what does one need when one is in gauged in a military. operation in europe or more precisely in front or in britain because let me tell you europe does not yet exist in a military sense. no europeans still rely on the american g.p.s. . during periods of diplomatic tensions 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 you're a strategic thinker you certainly do not want to be terrifying your allies that's hot it could wake up and you don't want to be provoking your enemies into taking actions to counter you. so i think we've stepped away 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 and many 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 her 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 happens 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 a will 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. ok to treat and all anti-satellite met in real ground based lasers conventional missiles in most orbiting systems can be used to destroy satellites. to truly guarantee that kill vehicles would only target missiles not satellites or burst down objects. and. components of a new treaty argue such promises are untenable and too late. 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 is simply nonsense or 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 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 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 not weaponized space.

as soon as he took office the white house announced that it would be seeking a worldwide ban on reckons 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 me including a program called offensive counter space. in the pentagon define this new program as offensive measures to disrupt. the grid or destroy any adverse or is face capabilities. yes. the air force academy of colorado springs for the doctrine of space control and its possible consequences study. is hard to tame space period already without attacking so i'm afraid that if we want space we're going to have to

tear and resistance which i don't know if you know much about all 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 junk is so high that nasa is worried that if there is never another watch of anything into space it is 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 mark on. the satellites construction unleashes a storm cloud of debris that founds outer 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 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

a 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 satellite. the entire world communication network is all satellite oriented. all this incredible investment from the united states and from the european union and canada and other countries like this all this is completely a jeopardy if we start putting weapons in outer space how would our world change if

we lost the use. satellites day one six fifteen am communication satellites hovering over the americas all newt over a swath of the globe with g.p.s. coverage collapses atomic clocks on g.p.s. satellites can transmit universities and your time as synchronization of nasa infrastructure is failed three hundred fifty million cell phones are disabled. hundreds of millions of internet connections vanish around the world card payments and bank accounts freeze millions of dollars are sucked 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 disrupted wide zones of cottons are blinded by blankets. coastguards are deaf the ship's distress calls. for dozens of aircrafts are missing air traffic controllers are fighting the panic worldwide flights are grounded or call back i did night there's been

a cascade of traffic crane both in the aircraft accidents. so far the world is awarded such a catastrophe. but a space war would kill satellites and blast tons of wreckage and 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 of option they say it's time six twenty five and this is a special as part of the conference on world affairs where discussing the militarization of space there is a point in time and maybe rapidly closing your eyes is a good dog and i suppose to such or there would be no arms race frankly i don't 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 after world war two we had the atomic bomb nobody else i think it's almost gone because we had a bigger explosive and with our comic weaponry. will be able to dominate the earth didn't last very long the soviets are an atomic bomb the chinese are donors are. likewise a space to think that we can move up there with reverend wright and be allowed to be the king be 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 of any it as it is and 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 would attempt to counter the united states and contest the control of space by a single simple power all nations stable and unstable would be dragged into a new arms race. the european union has been up until now opposed to the recognize ace of space. but for how much longer soon is immunity for the us continues to develop not only military satellites it's also space they used 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 will be quickly. russia has declared that if the united states goes on pursuing its doctrine it will have no choice but to destroy all ordered threats. give americans deploy. based based

antibodies to mistrial defenses then could you imagine interceptor raised on the space stations military stations would longer fly to detroit. or through the story old school try and not their food because he did it as a quite unacceptable i seen quite a rush. seriously when it is used 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 would. diminish domination of the factor a force is nursing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction my solution as . it is the signals in russia's opinion of the militarization of outer space could

have unpredictable consequences for the international community he 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. the weaponize ation of space could be the trigger that unleashes nuclear war. signy anxiety and just by putting weapons in space or launching weapons from space downs were. quoting juries by accident by human fallibility god designed by terrorists a launching up to now i'm south and hydrogen bombs in your singing short ice age and the death of my screeches on the planet. brownie

age of the nuclear precipice about to be annihilation. the military use of space seems inevitable the rather leave valving technology and the like of a strong treaty these are the door open to the most delicate 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 weapons 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.

sure is that so much. commercial. it will be on the brink of a time is running out for the american budget deficit failure to raise the debt ceiling would have a stronger concept. all

. in the united kingdom and she's available in ft hood the house bill and forty one hotel the old waverly hotel you can also tell.