Neil deGrasse Tyson explains why he thinks Russian space weapon 'makes no tactical sense'
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 20 фев 2024
- CNN's Jake Tapper speaks with astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson about the recent New York Times report stating that the US intelligence community has concerns that Russia may be planning to deploy a nuclear weapon in space. #CNN #News
![Moneybagg Yo - WHISKEY WHISKEY [feat. Morgan Wallen] (Official Audio)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kJamyq0WplE/mqdefault.jpg)
![100 Days - [Minecraft Creative 2]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/OmogWsk_ZZg/mqdefault.jpg)
Fear is the real weapon
While stupidity is the ammunition
They thrive's off that fr 😢
Neil doesn't seem too worried so I won't sweat it. Thanks Neil!
Right😂
Neil= 🗿
You do realize this story was made up to spread fear after the latest vote in Congress failed for another aid package for Ukraine?
Neil also believes that a man can become a woman just because he says he says he is, and thinks the science supports that.
They won't do it, someone will just buy a yacht.
It’s like announcing Russians now have sharks with friggin lasers LoL 😂
😂😂😂 Yes sir!
You should do some research on the history of space weapons before you open your mouth lol
@@sergeant_salty Perhaps he should indeed "do some research", but there is no doubt at all that you should get out more and enjoy the occasional movie or two ....
.... people on the internet still saying things like "do some research" ... ???
🤣🤣🤣...
I can't even bring myself to use similar phrases on a video that's all about "doing research" ..... 🤣🤣🤣
THIS
Lol it's just fear mongering.
@@aussiesurfer805 become shark food
I'm a retired aerospace engineer and agree fully with Tyson, who sees it clearly. Wernher von Braun touted the use of his space station design as a nuclear weapons platform, which was rejected by DoD in favor of ICBMs. Tyson was wrong about the time of flight of an ICBM. It's only 20 minutes rather than 45 minutes. If one were to do a Hohmann transfer of an orbital nuclear weapon to the ground, it would take half an orbital period of 90 minutes, for 45 minutes. Then again, submarine launched ballistic missiles can take as little as minutes to reach the target.
This suggests that the only use for an orbital nuke would be as an electromagnetic pulse weapon (EMP), or to take out a cluster of satellites. But immediate detonation of an EMP weapon would be an indication of an impending nuclear attack.
The reason for orbital nuke is obvious: Putin intends to so fear here. But like so much of his military, it's just a bluff.
Yeah, people seem to think that an orbital weapon dropped on Earth would somehow be faster and less detectable. If nothing else, the heat signature of an ICBM is nothing compared to the heat signature of a kinetic impactor during re-entry (or really ANYTHING in during re-entry). Nuclear weapons in space make little sense for a bunch of reasons, the least of which is that a kinetic impactor can do comparable damage without the side-effects.
Or this whole thing could be just more MIC/ CIA crap like WMDs or the GREAT Chinese weather balloon hysteria.
The threat from Russia - aggressive violent and MILITARY
Secure our Nation's interests in, from, and to space. The Space Force protects our country and the freedom to operate in space, keeping it secure, stable and accessible for military space power and new waves of innovation.
Wait a minute that is the mission statement of trump created US Space Force. Of course Russia would create a SF to fight in the war declared by trump.
@goBiz
He earned his Ph. D. in astrophysics from Columbia University in 1991.
Where was it now that you got your degree in being stupid?
@@SanDiegoBiz : He has a PhD in astrophysics from the University of Texas at Austin. His urbane manner, communication skills, and his creds are why he was selected to run the Hayden Planetarium in New York city. He mixes well with high society. I'll bet you're one of those bigots who thought he got his breaks from affirmative action, rather then them going so some deserving well-scrubbed WASP.
Kirk: “Mr Spock , what the hell is that”!?
Spock: “. I am currently in contact with Mr deGrasse this very moment captain “
😁😁😁😁
Putin likes having nuke measuring contests. He's compensating.
The future belongs to the countless asteroids that are floating around near eath and, when used in a targeted manner, have a larger impact radius than the radioactively contaminated atomic bombs.
"He's compensating"? How do you know have you seen his privates? You sound like a Gabe.
Could be a first strike weapon if it contains MIRVS. Two facilite a 2 minute decapitation strike. Its also possible its retaliatory failsafe.
There's powerful masers (a microwave laser) here on earth that can fry its electronics. You use one of these on it and then you go fetch it and study it.
This is spy balloon category.
I think it might have something to do with Starlink.
Pandora box Putin dares place warheads in space.
The way he says “Pewtin”
With a scorched earth operation, the nuclear power that would use it would be assuming that they have the upper-hand at *initiating* *the* *world-wide* *attack* *without* *warning.* If Russia (or anyone) was willing to use that, they would be assuming that their enemy would be *left* *entirely* *unable* *to* *counter-attack* *after* *the* *initial* *action.* In my estimation, this is a very grandiose set of assumptions/presumptions and is probably aimed at inducing fear instead of being a practical course of action.
If you take into account the mighty empty threats by Putin, this last claim will be another ridiculous Russian propaganda.
The Soviet knows only one thing, respects one thing and that is force. Dean Atcheson /Cuban missile crisis. They do tend to leap before they look. That you cannot estimate their strategy speaks only to your logic of thought. You are a unicorn.
They would be assuming nobody could counter attack. If you do careless things like that nobody is gonna want to share this earth with you.
@@domerame5913 I am in *no* way saying that I agree with what the Russian leaders are doing.
The leaders of the free world have been standing against dictators, tyrants for years. Some people in foreign countries have not caught on to the idea of freedom and allow these dictators, tyrants, etc. to change the laws and keep power indefinitely.
I would say that China needs to speak up and calm down Russian rhetoric because China would surely be affected negatively with the serious and yet "careless things" that are being spoken and contemplated.
@@k.c.sunshine1934leaders of which free world? The elites in the industrial military complex? , big tech? Holly wood? Or big pharma? 😂😂😂 Give me a break all your dictators are unelected and sitting behind closed doors, you think Biden and em are leaders or puppets?? . Your leaders be killing other people's elected leaders in the name of democracy😂😂😂 but murdered Lincoln and Kennedy would be dictators too if they only knew what democracy and capitalism was about. Gay rights and money backed by air!!!
Because it's easier to drop it from space
The only use would be EMP.
which would take out satellites of China, India, the UK, France, Germany and their own, along with whomever they were targetting. Hence why it makes no tactical sense.
The total cost of the Voyager mission from May 1972 through the Neptune encounter (including launch vehicles, radioactive power source (RTGs), and DSN tracking support) is 865 million dollars. At first, this may sound very expensive, but the fantastic returns are a bargain when we place the costs in the proper perspective. It is important to realize that:
So the Russia Device is nuclear power it has not been built and we put Voyager 1 and 2 both radioactive power source so we did this 50 years ago
to all people jumping up and down Here your sign
Oops picked the wrong guest, that's not what they wanted to hear Neil. They wanted to hear be afraid be very very afraid
Look up the term "vaporware". It costs nothing to announce that you have or are developing an unstoppable wonder weapon.
You mean like a fake hypersonic missle? A fake tank? Their fighters navigate using a cellphone and Google Maps.
@@dreed7312 Like a Zircon hypersonic perhaps
Not space weapon. It's "special military equipment."
how do you command troops when the satellite you use for communication is not operational
You use radio
@johnruddick686 good thing radio signals can't be jammed
There are alternatives communication methods to satellites. What do you think we did before the middle of the 20th century?
@nathanbyd570 I was only trying to point out that in this day and age, communication is taken for granted and if an opposing force can control or manipulate what is being communicated, it could be devastating.
I think they have more than one satellite for military operations and more than one method of communication. It's called redundancy. Plus, putin could take a satellite out right now with current tech, it's all just for show.
they came up with it themselves, they were scared, they calmed down themselves...
If you have things in place for after everything's shut down, you wouldn't give af about things getting shut down.. in my opinion, very much tactical
*Russia🇷🇺 have border /maritime disputes with Ukraine & Japan.*
make border/maritime agreement & peace!
it's called 'war crimes'
Russia must pay.
Its a star war about to start and Neil still wondering lol
What he is forgetting is early warning. Ground launches are pretty much covered by Vela, etc.. but forcing people to watch space is also another psychology game.
Yeah but this weapon isn't a nuke that gets dropped on Earth. Did you not listen to a word that was said?
lmfao this is most likely an anti satellite weapon, nukes emit an emp when they go off even if there is no shockwave
traditional warheads are like 500lbs without propulsion, it would be incredibly difficult to get enough up there to make a different in the outcome of all out nuclear war, given there are thousands on the ground and hundreds under the sea. if you do get a whole lot up there, it will weigh a lot and be incredibly difficult to change its orbit to a new target. its harder the more it weighs. we can also easily see it. it would have to drop nukes at a certain point in its orbit to hit parts of the US and you can make sure its watched there
on the other hand, if it has a handful of the smallest warheads necessary for fission, it could nimbly switch orbits and take out the US's GPS constellation through emps, which their military heavily relies on.
also seems like the intelligence agencies would know better and they think its anti satellite
It's fascinating to hear Neil deGrasse Tyson share his insights on space and technology! His ability to break down complex topics into understandable concepts is truly impressive. Regardless of the specifics of the space weapon topic, it's always enlightening to consider the broader implications of space exploration and technology. It's a reminder of how important it is to approach scientific and technological advancements with a sense of responsibility and ethical consideration. Keep exploring and learning about these intriguing subjects! 🌌🚀✨
He is displaying the American flag incorrectly.
The disrespect is unreal.
It’s the 2024 version of Sputnik 😮
It's almost like we need a Space Force or something................oh wait.
I think Neil missed the point that starting a intercontinal missile will be seen on radar and there is less time to defend when the nuke starts in orbit. cruisical time.
No he didn't miss it. What you missed is the part where this weapon isn't one designed to be dropped from orbit. it is designed to take out satellites, for which it makes no sense as you would also knock out a every other satellite, including your own and those of your allies...
Dropping something from orbit would actually take longer than an ICBM because you have to de-orbit first, so it would be detectable for all that time and the heat generated by re-entry would be easily detectable, much more detectable than the heat signature of an ICBM's engine...
You know there’s no gravity in space, right? The nuke wouldn’t fall
FYI: you don't even need a nuke: look up Project Thor - and you'll see how simple it is to waste an entire region with a simple metal rod dropped from orbit
@@bipolarminddroppings every weapon doesn't go 'kaplooey' ~ emps can be directed and aimed at target satellites - leaving them disabled -
@@peterlongprong7521 ^ also called the rods of god, or kinetic bombardment, you get multiple satellites orbiting the planet and you can kill anyone on the planet at anytime you would want to.
16 Million subscribers and only 14,000 views?
If you generate an EMP pulse above the continental US without any warning or declaration of war. What would still be working after that? Not much…
its about inflicting irritation and fear. stay reasonable.
I understand the reasoning for this. We should be concerned, because while we might win the war in the end, there will be a lot of battles we stand to lose. After a while, both sides could have lost enough that we just might forget what we're fighting over. As I once heard, WW3 is not going to be a war where it's a matter of who's right & who's wrong, but who's left.
I could only imagine that there are defenses in place that would remove the threat of ICBM's? The president of Russia has already mentioned more than once that they have technologies that will move missiles perhaps at 10,000 mph and improving all the time - hypersonic-weapons. And any measure would be trying to survive the unsurvivable war by knocking everything, especially technology, into the stone age.
The aliens will not allow that.
The president of Russia lies all the time. His words cannot be trusted.
Doomsday device using cobalt-thorium G
Disclaimer and Trigger warning: This video contains copious amounts of truth and common sense. These values have been found to break what ever Trump supporters use to think with.
I imagine the humiliation of being hoodwinked by a dementia patient is unbearable😂
@@Doc_Holiday did trump hoodwink you again.
Trump lives rent free in Democrat minds today
@@TT-qo9dv I think it's more of a continuing thing than "again"?
Here’s a truth that may trigger you and other rabid leftists: Putin endorsed Biden last week over Trump during a TV interview
This story was out a year ago Why it's gaining any traction now is just To change talking point
Because Ukraine funding support has been dying . The “Putin secret agents are flaming Palestinian protesters“ didnt work so they had to quickly figure something else out
old news, recycled - since they don't want to do actual work about the current state of the world, they rehash old news.
The dangerous aspect of these Russian satellites is that although ypu see only one when you look at it, there ks anpther, smaller one inside it...
And a smaller one onside that one...
And an even smaller one onside that one...
Terrifying.
This actually makes perfect sense. Their forces have larger numbers. We use technology to offset these numbers. Without technology it becomes a sheer numbers problem. Who has the larger conventional force.
Russia has never been weaker.
Actually Russia has taken on 30 nato countries at one time and won 😁
They have the best hypersonic missiles on earth, the Zircon. Russia is far from weak. Their avangard missile is also considered best in the world for non boost-glide hypersonics.
@@noneshere Don't know how you can say Russia won being bogged down in Ukraine and loosing a significant part of your Black Sea Navy against a country without a Navy. But the USSR lost to NATO over 30 years ago.
@@resterAnonymenafo just spent 300biliion dollars in Ukraine just to deafeat Rusia and failed Horribly 😂,
Shows how much you know...
Russia doesn't want to take Ukraine, it wants to maintain access to the med sea below and has secured that swath of land already .
hopefully someone can discuss why we dont make a balloon from earth to outer space, so we can walk to outer space, in hopes we build a balloon that can go to the moon , then we can just walk to the moon, we should focus all our energy on making a balloon that dont explode, makes way more sense then wasting billions on a rocket ship
He assumes Putin has knowledge of the consequences of weaponizing space, or cares. Downplaying it is stupid.
The threat is real. It does needs scientistific explanation when it comes to Russian scientists
When powerful people nations always in fighting mood the ordinary people us will never be in peace
That's No Moon - It's a Space Station!
Wouldn't Dropping a nuke from space prevent detection of thermal signature from ballistic missiles and render the anti missile defense system useless?
yeah, because the heat from re-entry at orbital speeds isn't easily detectable, much more detectable than the heat signature of a missile flying through the atmosphere...
plus, this isn't a weapon to be dropped on Earth, which you would know if you had LISTENED TO WHAT WAS SAID.
There’s no gravity in space for dropping nukes
@@bloodgout ehm.. what? did you skip science classes? 😆
@@bloodgout There is gravity in space. The weightlessness you see on the ISS is because it is orbiting Earth. An orbit is equivalent to Free Falling- it's because you are traveling so fast, you never hit the ground because the horizon is curving away from you at the same rate as you fall. Hard to describe... easier if you look up a video about orbiting the Earth. Regards.
Laundry in public 🙄
Well it only does in terms of the superiority of US space equipment, so Russia losing theirs is less important.
Love neil
I like this guy but he is blatantly wrong on some topics. Nuclear weapons in space are VERY much a problem, ICBM's take 45 minutes to target which allows for a counter strike to be launched. A nuke already in space will only take a couple minutes to deorbit and strike a target. This is huge it means the enemy can take out command and control centers and the President himself before the launch codes for a counter strike are given. It circumvents mutual assured destruction and that's not a good thing.
This weapon they are talking about is not that so don't panic. It's a nuclear powered EMP type of weapon designed to take out satellites. But actual warheads parked in space is very much a big deal, he should not minimize it.
ICBM's take 20 minutes to hit, not 45. And anything de-orbited from LEO takes at least 45 minutes to land (half of it's orbital period). You literaly don't understand how orbital physics works. We can get something into orbit in 8 minutes, but it then takes another 45 minutes to land if you immediately start to slow down for re-entry. The heat caused by that re-entry is much more detectable than an ICBM and would give you a similar amount of warning.
Nuclear weapons dropped from space make no sense, since you can just drop a kinetic impactor that will do the same damage but not cause nuclear fall out.
If you wanted to drop a nuke from space, in the manner you are thinking it works, aka from space to ground in a few minutes, you would first need to take it from orbital speed, to close to zero, in space, which would cause a massive heat signature, and be easily detectable, and would take minutes upon minutes of burning engines to achieve. You cant just point a gun at the ground from space and shoot it at the Earth, that isn't how things work.
@@bipolarminddroppings
Wow. I bet you impress your friends with your "extensive knowledge" don't you? Well, you ain't impressing me. Here's why.
1.
The 45 minute time frame is stated by Neil DeGrasse Tyson in this video. Time stamp is 2:00, if you want to check. I don't know where you have your 20 minute figure but from plume to impact a ICBM will take somewhere between 30 and 45 minutes. Submarine based nuclear vectors may be faster but those are not ICBM's.
2.
The numbers you are talking about refer to de-orbiting a civilian satellite. Those don't have any reason to hurry, in fact they have every reason to minimize the reentry speed and impact speed. You can very well achieve impact within a few minutes from ignition in orbit if you use full power. That is precisely why a international treaty exists that bans nuclear weapons "parked" in orbit.
3.
The payload of a SS-18 Satan ICBM is 20 Megatons. That is 20x 4.2 x10^15 Joules of energy.
The potential and kinetic energy combined of a Space Shuttle in orbit is 3.2 x10^9 Joules.
You need around twenty million Space Shuttles impacting at the same time to release the same amount of energy as a single ICBM. Give or take, a bit more actually.
Here's the deal, you don't have to know complicated orbital mechanics to understand the kinetic energy of an object falling from height is equal or lower than the energy expended to put it there. Which would be the rocket. Now rockets are a mighty thing, sure, but thermonuclear explosions are orders of magnitude "mightier" if that's a word. If you had technical training of any kind the kinetic impactor concept would not pass your smell test. Don't tell me you are actually working in any engineering related field. I would be very disappointed.
Tyson makes some valid points, but the still-standing issue is that this potentially represents a Russian attempt to bypass US air defense.
The US has a well-developed and layered system for intercepting ICBMs at different stages, including the proven Patriot system at the terminal stage of flight, but a missile launched from space does not have a trajectory like what that defense apparatus was developed for.
Satelites have held limited usefulness to Russia due to Russia's inability to fund sufficient coverage to make them a reliable component to surveillance, and similarly, I think that such a weapon's offensive usefulness is going to be limited (as Tyson states, you'd have to wait for it to be overhead, and how do you even manage international talks to line up your threats with the window of danger?). However, it is still a more credible "big stick" threat, where Russia uses it as leverage to prevent western military intervention. If a western military wanted to intervene, they'd then need to plan for the reality that that nuke was eventually going to be overhead, and that Russians might then make the urgent call to perform the strike while the window of opportunity exists.
And that's the kind of diplomacy that Russia has used for a long time. They're always trying to find a way to convince the west that intervention just isn't worth it.
It could be an EMP weapon designed to take out multiple satellites in an area with the electro-magnetic pulse from a single blast.
it would only take 3 such weapons detonated in the atmosphere above the USA to stretch the effects of an EMP to cover the country. PLUS every weapon doesn't go 'kaplooey' ~ emps can be directed and aimed at target satellites - leaving them disabled -
Why would Russia take out hundreds of Chinese, Indian, private commercial, their own, etc satellites?
Is it reasonable to assume here that there are rational opponents with sensible tactical objectives?
Unclear. But deGrasse Tyson's argument is garbage anyway. He's saying that Russia would never use their weapon because the collateral damage on their own side would be too high. By the same argument, no chess player would ever exchange queens with their opponent. Except chess players do that _all the time._
@@beeble2003dudes a social media physicists, not a battle tactician not a psychologist. Is opinion is as good as mines on this subject
@@shinji1264 Exactly -- his opinion is as good as anybody else's who doesn't know what they're talking about. So why ask him?
@@beeble2003Because NDT is a science communicator w/ a degree in Physics and Astronomy & was on the Congressional Panel which recommended the creation of the Space Force (i.e. space-based weapons).
@@beeble2003bro you did not just compare a chess game on the same level of the possibility wiping out most satellite stations in the world and dooming humanity to stay on earth for the rest of the forcible future like HUHH you say chess players would sacrifice there queen for another that's not a good description of what would happen it would be more like I break the chess broad in half and get rid of all my pieces and the opponents it's still mutually assured destruction just with destroyed satellites in space making it impossible to leave earth and most likely doom are planet to eventually run out of resources and die
He doesn't seem right about space based nukes. Also ASAT systems cannot reach higher satellites. Plus EMP is not generated in space after an explosion but in the atmosphere...
I trust his logic Dr Neil Degrasse is a highly intelligent scientist!
His logic is garbage. He's saying that Russia could never use this weapon because the collateral damage would be too high. By the same argument, chess players would never exchange queens (I take out your most powerful piece but lose my own). Only thing is, chess players exchange queens all the time, because there are many situations in which it makes perfect sense.
@@beeble2003 That's your analogy? Sacrificing an "effing" piece of plastic in a game? LOL!
@@Professor_Fate The point is that, sometimes, taking something from your opponent while giving up something of equal value is a good strategy. Apparently, simple explanations of simple things are too hard for you.
Omg, Russia,Russia, Russia get over the obsession
A solitary path can be a wiser choice than an ill-fated partnership. Seek self-fulfillment, and a harmonious bond will follow.
I like how Tapper does the head tilt while de Grasse is explaining. 😂
What do you think of Donnie's dancing?
Thanks Neil for reminding us who we probably should listen to 😂.
Ask Trump, he is the Space Farce expert.
My anxiety drops from 10 to 0 every time Neil explains issues base on science in common sense.
Hope Neil's doing alright these days. Worrisome weird new space weapon. No one really seems to know what it is so many assumptions are made. How do you know this is some sort of bomb? Couldn't the nuke be to power something else? Smh. Thanks for a good report.
@@user-zm6qj9cz7b you pay your taxes to Russia?
We know exactly what it is. What you’re seeing in the news is pure speculation based unclassified information. The classified information is completely different, much more detailed and accurate than anything you will see in the media. We already have assets and resources in place to counter anything like this. Bear in mind it hasn’t even been deployed yet.
I used to think Russia had a lot of smart people. Now I know better, and theres no accounting for what a fool might do.
An EMP weapon represents an asymmetric strategy to level the playing field by disabling satellites are a large part of our "Network-Centric Warfare" situational awareness and advantage. In a world of disruptive AI, Russia is perhaps establishing a method to stop the US short of a full scale nuclear war. Kinetic weapons are not as immediate as prepositioned EMP nukes. Also this provides another major form of deterrence short of nuclear war.
Things in orbit being where you want it to be, is not immediate.
This is obviously fearmongering by a senator who's too stupid to formulate something better as a scare tactic.
Pretty sure a small number of EMP detonations 10 or 20 maybe can take out all of our satellites. But it would take terrestrial electronics as well. @@tylerdurden3722
Neil didn't solve 'The Poincare Conjecture' tho
NdG is not only smart but he is intelligent and he can explain anything so everyone can understand.
🤣
I’ll bet you have the same opinion of the ladies on the View 😂
His master-classes are repeat watching for me as I am hamstrung by limited absorbtion . The first, second and third values of ANY of them as I see it are the simplicity of genuine logical and critical-thinking less assumptions.. which is in ANY situation you will find yourself in, a dividend-paying, pillar of common sense staple for living in this world.
Everyone except the people that laugh at your comment. They can also be intelligent people as well but can explain complexed things in a simplistic way. I know some people who are so smart but they are sheltered from the real world.
@@SMOOVKILL1 It's actually complex, not complexed but, hey, NONE of us are laughing at your comment grammar 101
Putin would cripple a whole bunch of satellites at once.
As Neil mentioned there are thousands of satellites and the orbits would have to intersect precisely for the thing to damage more than one satellite. He doesn’t say this, but he sounds like he’s saying it’s all BS basically.
including China's, India's, Pakistan's, the UK's France, Germany. He would basically have committed an act of war against every country on Earth.
Including his own
I wonder what our Top Secret space plane is doing while it's orbiting Earth 🌎❓
He is wrong about satellites. We have satellites in a geosynchronous orbit, standing on the surface and looking at those satty, they would look like they are staying still. They are orbiting at the same rate the Earth turns. Those are our DFCS network used for communication. We used GPS a lot in the military, taking out GPS satty will impact our navigation. It isn't cheap or practical to use nukes on satty, but it makes tactical sense to try and take out satellites. We have better and cheaper ways to do it. But once something is in space and has a mission to kill a satty, there is nothing we can do to stop it.
But the point is that there are cheaper ways with no chance of unwanted collateral damage, he was right about the broader point. Unless you're a strongman like Putin and relish bringing an AK-47 to a BB gun firing range.
@@jamessanders145I already said there are cheaper ways to take down a satty. Try to keep up.
you literally said the same thing Neil said. He doesn't understand the point of such a weapon when "we have better and cheaper ways to do it"
@@natsune09 why don't you try to keep up with Neil then?
@@jamessanders145 Because he is wrong about sattys, they don't all have an orbit where its crossing our sky, he is also wrong that there is no tactical reason to attack satellite. You need to keep up with what is going on.
Putin already denied it by laughing about it when they asked him lol
Yeah, like when he denied he was planning to invade Ukraine. You can definitely trust that Gollum-lookalike.
Keep crying
When are we going to talk about the elephant in the room though… the JEWISH space lazers?
Even if russia use a strong magnetic flare in space (as Putin said), the satellites will be out for 1 hour maximum, and eveb NOT ALL of them, but only an area of several kilometers in space, that's like nothing.
This was done many years ago. It's very annoying when they report things 20 years after it happened.
Thanks, Ronny Dementia Reagan, for getting rid of truth in "news."
Regardless of any precedent, they're reporting on a current event.
The lack of self awareness considering your dementia patient messiah Joe lol
@@jasonm3835They're currently reporting on a 20 year old event.
@ItIsThisBig Apparently this information came from our intelligence community, so there was something new of national interest. The Biden admin briefed congress and our allies in Europe on "advances Russia has made" in this area. That wouldn't have happened if this was 20 yr old information.
The lack of self awareness from a supporter of dementia Joe lol
Vlady likes scary weapons that only serve the purpose of fear. Scary nuclear powered torpedoes and missiles, nukes in space. It’s all a part of his pattern. He knows his country is weak, so you build big, scary weapons (that may or may not work as advertised) to make it seem you’re more intimidating than you actually are.
You say now, when it happens don't cry.
@@zfontain1975when what happens, putin screws himself?
Pluto is a Planet.
Pluto is a dog.
The second army of the world captured the broken small city for 2 years and laid down 50 thousand.
Sounds like this news about the Russian weapon has a lot of holes after listening to Neil DeGrasse.
I love neil brain
Neil is the type of person to wake up his family to let them know he’s going to bed
American intelligence agencies have told their closest European allies that if Russia is going to launch a nuclear weapon into orbit, it will probably do so this year - but that it might instead launch a harmless “dummy” warhead into orbit to leave the West guessing about its capabilities.
The assessment came as American intelligence officials conducted a series of rushed, classified briefings for their NATO and Asian allies, as details of the American assessment of Russia’s intentions began to leak out.
Lolol i laughed so hard
You didn't understand a word he said did you?
I love Neil ..... but that's so good... you nailed him - no doubt ...
Accurate.
Russians are not using kinetics to destroy satellites, because it`s expensive and Starlink could send more satellites than they lose. But one big bang that destroy a large quantity, in certain time could give them big strategic advantage.
you think this is about Starlink? lol
As with all bullies, Putin is using it for the terror threat points:
Can he disable Starlink?
there are currently 5500 starlink satellites in orbit right now. how do you disable that?
The Russians did it to say, "We did a thing!"
Have rockets? ✔️
Have nuclear bombs?✔️
They did something the US, the EU, China, and India could have done for decades.
Except we have a treaty to not allow this.
@@onehitpick9758only way we don’t allow it is by making a deal or going to war if Russia wants it there and doesn’t care what rest of the world thinks then we need to start making arrangements on our end and deal with it
Many more countries could have done it. Most countries who use nuclear energy could probably develop a nuclear weapon under wraps under the right leadership.
Except Russia is ruled by a dictator, similarly to China, and dictators are dangerous species.
@@onehitpick9758 Not everyone has signed the treaty.
I wonder if this would be a beneficial strategic move for the US in an effort to maintain global economic and military dominace. I don't know just asking.
remember the arms race in the Reagan years that nearly bankrupted both opposing nations and left them with enough nukes to destroy the entire planet x20 times over? no, its not beneficial - its insanity
Why have pitbull dogs 🐕 yet scared of Borzoi??
I wish i was as smart as Neil.
He believes boys can be girls. He's not that smart.
you might be, you just aren't as well educated in physics.
He isn't that smart. He believes boys can be girls.
He believes xy can be xx.
there's SUPPIUSED TO BE a ban on orbital nuclear weapons because
...AMERICA WANTED TO DO THIS in the 1960s,
so the RUSSIANS wanted a treaty
AMERICA had a program called STARFISH PRIME to investigate this very question
Sorry, but this is silly. As usual, deGrasse Tyson is very eloquent and sounds convincing, hiding the fact that his argument is garbage. By his argument, no chess player would take their opponent's queen in a manoeuvre that lost their own queen -- the collateral damage to your own side is as bad as the damage you inflict on your enemy. "That makes no tactical sense", except it makes perfect tactical sense in many situations, and chess grandmasters exchange queens _all the time._
Unlike what you and other russian hating war hawks think, War is NOT a game of chess.
@@omusaatsawatuukha2513 I'm not claiming that war is a game of chess. I'm using chess as an analogy to point out the absurdity of deGrasse Tyson's argument.
@@omusaatsawatuukha2513
? Let's review.
President King piece.
Vice president Queen piece .
Bishops = propagandists religous nuts spys and saboteurs.
Rooks nuclear chem bio deterrence .
Knights = Spec ops Special forces .
Pawns = Military or milita members .
The object of the War or chess game
???? Win the war force your opponent to surrender or a Draw.
Tip Life is not a game .
War is strategy.
Only putin sucks at wizards 🧙♂️ chess .
Example ????
The Russian Military collapse in
Ukraine 🇺🇦.
They say fortune favors the bold!
Or the prepared .
But in Chess, you can't also take out the queen of a 3rd/4th/5th player unintentionally... also in Chess, it doesn't matter if you win with only a King and a pawn on the board, so long as you win, hence why exchanging queens is often done. Real life doesn't work that way.
How do you think China or India or Pakistan would feel about Russia taking out their satellites along with the US? Or how the UK, France, Germany etc would feel? He would literally piss off the entire world.
Yeah but it’s Russia they’ll use it even if they can’t guarantee targets
Reminds me of The Irregular at Magic High School movie, having a satellite weapon equipped with nukes means that if the worst happens, you just irradiated half the planet.
Not necessarily, depends on how far from the atmosphere it is
nah lol. US has nuked the air above 5 people before. That thing is not gonna do anything to us on earth
Does anyone else feel that Neil has been a bit off?
He’s incredibly intelligent, don’t get me wrong, but his use of filler information seems to be increasing to appeal to an audience of sorts.
The way he’s wording things these days, again he’s intelligent, it just seems he’s using scientific words interchangeably to convey… blah, blah, blah… for example, “We have the kinetic energy force to destroy some satellites.”
Well, yeah… but that’s not really what we’re trying to acknowledge here.
The reason someone like Neil would be puzzled about this russian "strategy" as he has pointed out it's obvious failures is very simple should you give me the latitude to theorize. He has been mis-informed as to the details of the actual weaponry and it's purpose intentionally..so whilst he looks at the "puzzle" presented him, befuddled as to the logic behind it, indeed he is correct and...IF he had been presented ALL of what we are genuinely aware of for said weapon it would be "case closed" and "t'was a stupid idea" would bring this to a closure. Now, I am NOT a conspiracy theorist and detest the stupid for buying into wild ideas that allow their imaginations to run unchecked into the twighlight zone BUT..I do find it interesting that the media coverage and political knee-jerk "this calls for immediate discussion" response was what it was and predictably it is always tethered to the shiny object the media chases... and in this case presented by DOD and Agency alike...which (speculative..buuut) was tossed in the water as chum to attract the feeders....for what purpose? I'll sum it up. We are aware of a space-based threat that the russians are working on, no doubt about that BUT, the true nature of it's weaponry AND more importantly IT'S INTENDED PURPOSE AND TARGET(S) is what is NOT being divulged in an effort to gain the funding necessary to counter what we do not want to reveal what we know OR ... maybe are not even absolute in what we know about it other than, "The russians are up to no good and it doesn't bode well" so then, "we need to address this with a new program as we're going to need more money" I'm not against ANY of that logic AT ALL, just a little s'picious of what I see as large gaps in what we're so intent on countering when by all rights ..if Neil is thinking " T'was a stupid idea" then, either the fog I have laid out has truth to it OR, the russians are really just that stupid in which case a coin toss, farmers almanac success rate is true. Yikes.
Level the playing field. It makes perfect sense.
Not really. This wouldn’t level the playing field. He’d just damage his own satellites and blind himself
@@bloodgout the American forces will be totaly helpless without the electronics. Learn to fight without it. Warfare is older that satellites or even electricity.
♥ Excellent story ♥♥♥ Thank you for covering this important event. My heart goes out to all the families affected by recent events.
Possibly, Russia still knows how to wage war the old-fashioned way, and they are not as dependent on satellite technology as we are. Russia is also using human wave attacks in Ukraine, so I can't imagine they care about their satellites.
His logic makes sense but what goes up must come down but where with a nuke???🦅
if you are dropping something from space, it makes much more sense to just drop a kinetic impactor that will cause the same damage without the nuclear fallout.
Russia can't even take over Ukraine. How worried am I supposed to be? Rumor in the '50s had them with nuclear powered airplanes. Still waiting to see one.
In before Neil is labelled a "Russian asset"
Meanwell?