Countries base their decisions on whether to acquire or develop weapon systems on many factors. The successful demonstration or deployment of a space weapon will have a negligible impact on this decision-making process that is already underway around the world. Countries will pursue space weapons based on how they fit within their strategic or economic goals.
Can you improve on this argument text? Help develop this argument by editing and adding more information or click on one of the edit links below to add a counter, supporting, or related argument.
You can help improve this argument by adding a supporting argument.
You can help improve this argument by adding a related argument.
The U.S.. and Soviet experience with MIRVs is often brought up to show how Washington’s "naïve" foray into missile madness provoked Moscow to respond in kind. But to arrive at this conclusion, one must suspend all awareness of the strategic context surrounding the MIRV decision and assume that America had (and still has) a monopoly on knowledge. ( More ... ) Lambakis, Steven. "Space Weapons: Refuting the Critics." Policy Review. (February 2001). [ 11 quotes ]
When evaluating a threat to U.S. space-based military and commercial assets, it is important to note that possession of a technology by a potentially hostile power does not mean that the country will be able to translate the technology into an effective military system. During the Cold War, the Soviet Union had scientists and engineers doing cutting-edge work, but it often found it extremely costly and difficult to produce in quantity—or sometimes prototype—the most cutting-edge systems, equipment, or devices. ( More ... ) Pena, Charles V. and Edward Hudgins. Should the United States 'Weaponize' Space? Military and Commercial Implications. Washington, D.C.: CATO Institute, March 18, 2002. [ 5 quotes ] [ page 9-10 ]