Weapons in Space - United States Admits their Presence

in Popular STEM19 hours ago

Video Credit- CRUXnews YouTube channel, US Reveals Space Weapons for First Time... September 2026

Thanks for the engagement, @wgonz. I am giving away steem basic income for engaged readers who comment and am glad to be part of the community.

Space weapons have been the subject of conversation for years. The 1967 Outer Space Treaty was signed by the UN was an agreement to stop countries from putting weapons platforms in space that was without teeth and had loopholes. Weapons have come a long way since then, and platforms and technology have evolved to reduce strike times and increase their effectiveness and the magnitude of their yield.

Ronald Reagan started a controversy in the 1980a with "Star Wars" projects and technology. Before this, countries considered deploying weapons to space as satellites including Sputnik became viable. Satellites became platforms for spying on and striking nations, and action was taken in the UN to stem the tide. That sentiment is now over as the United States has admitted they have weapons in space of which we do not fully understand.

Currently, weapons in space deployed by the United States exist to protect our satellites and country from China and Russia. Weapons in space have been banned due to their ability to reduce the notification time from strikes. A first strike from space would give a country almost no warning and damage to satellites from EMPs and conventional weapons could disable communications infrastructure massively. Space junk is a persistent issue to be made much worse.

This is a startling admission, but I am not shocked. EMP weapons, nuclear weapons and lasers/projectile weapons have been theorized to exist on platforms above Earth for decades.

War in space is terrifying. I hope new treaties arise for this issue.

Sort:  

El dato de que EE.UU. admitió armas en espacio en 2026, después del tratado de 1967, me dejó pensando en lo rápido que pasó de “Star Wars” a realidades operativas; la diferencia se nota cuando mencionan EMP y láseres como opciones concretas. Esto es genial porque abre la discusión sobre nuevos tratados, aunque la práctica de proteger satélites con armas parece un círculo vicioso. 🚀