Wilshire@lemmy.world to World News@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 year agoWhite House confirms Russia developing 'anti-satellite capability'abcnews.go.comexternal-linkmessage-square11fedilinkarrow-up1160arrow-down110
arrow-up1150arrow-down1external-linkWhite House confirms Russia developing 'anti-satellite capability'abcnews.go.comWilshire@lemmy.world to World News@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 year agomessage-square11fedilink
minus-squareoriginalucifer@moist.catsweat.comlinkfedilinkarrow-up19arrow-down1·1 year agowhy would you need a Nuke against a satellite? youd think a good laser would do pretty well in close proximity with a lot less debris
minus-squareAllonzeeLV@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up29·edit-21 year agoWidespread EMP could take out many satellites at once. A nuclear detonation is just the only practical way to generate a giant one.
minus-squareDave@lemmy.nzlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up10·1 year agoThe magic part is that you launch the nuke through the satellite, then it falls back to earth on top of your enemy. Or perhaps the debris is the point?
minus-squareEdibleFriend@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up6·1 year agoI mean… The nuke would work though
minus-squarelemmylommy@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·1 year agoToo big and too high power requirements
why would you need a Nuke against a satellite? youd think a good laser would do pretty well in close proximity with a lot less debris
Widespread EMP could take out many satellites at once.
A nuclear detonation is just the only practical way to generate a giant one.
The magic part is that you launch the nuke through the satellite, then it falls back to earth on top of your enemy.
Or perhaps the debris is the point?
I mean… The nuke would work though
Too big and too high power requirements
deleted by creator