Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 3:54 pm
Ok. I admit it, I must be a social outcast. WTF is this "Holy Shoot the Chicken" sh!t?ladajo wrote:If results are Holy Shoot the Chicken! good
a discussion forum for Polywell fusion
https://talk-polywell.org/bb/
Ok. I admit it, I must be a social outcast. WTF is this "Holy Shoot the Chicken" sh!t?ladajo wrote:If results are Holy Shoot the Chicken! good
Sorry, the Air Force is only ~64 years old, while the Navy was there at the beginning and before! Upstart Air Farce!CaptainBeowulf wrote: I don't know... if the navy is able to start building starships, they might be able to put together a solid case to take over the air force. One 90 year old instance of interservice rivalry solved!
If the Navy starts putting troops into space, we'd wind up with Space Marines.KitemanSA wrote:Sorry, the Air Force is only ~64 years old, while the Navy was there at the beginning and before! Upstart Air Farce!CaptainBeowulf wrote: I don't know... if the navy is able to start building starships, they might be able to put together a solid case to take over the air force. One 90 year old instance of interservice rivalry solved!
The term "Marines" is just using a foreign language word for "sea" (mar) to label soldiers on the sea. Soldiers in space should thus be termed "astrenes". Astrones? Cosmenes? What is your suggestion?Skipjack wrote:In my favorite sci fi novel series Perry Rhodan, the US had the "US Space Forces". Back in the 50ies they imagined that this would be the entity to put the first man on the moon. I still like the sound of it...
"Space Marines" rule too though.
If we had the kind of disruptive technology seemingly necessary to truly militarizing space--meaning something like M-E physics or other propellantless based that made launch and travel as practical as say, air travel--then many of the distinctions between our services could crumble. Enabling transport so in space, would likewise enable it for all the other services. Some spacecraft would "fly" under the ocean as submarines. So it seems to me possible, even likely, we'd end up with a single Defense Service and either call it that, or perhaps adopt a generic use of the term "Army".KitemanSA wrote:The term "Marines" is just using a foreign language word for "sea" (mar) to label soldiers on the sea. Soldiers in space should thus be termed "astrenes". Astrones? Cosmenes? What is your suggestion?
or "Fleet". Would the President then appoint a Sky Marshall?GIThruster wrote:If we had the kind of disruptive technology seemingly necessary to truly militarizing space--meaning something like M-E physics or other propellantless based that made launch and travel as practical as say, air travel--then many of the distinctions between our services could crumble. Enabling transport so in space, would likewise enable it for all the other services. Some spacecraft would "fly" under the ocean as submarines. So it seems to me possible, even likely, we'd end up with a single Defense Service and either call it that, or perhaps adopt a generic use of the term "Army".KitemanSA wrote:The term "Marines" is just using a foreign language word for "sea" (mar) to label soldiers on the sea. Soldiers in space should thus be termed "astrenes". Astrones? Cosmenes? What is your suggestion?
Hmmm. You are a real Trooper.EricF wrote: or "Fleet". Would the President then appoint a Sky Marshall?
Yeah, from that POV you are of course right. But then you could not call it a "space navy" either.The term "Marines" is just using a foreign language word for "sea" (mar) to label soldiers on the sea. Soldiers in space should thus be termed "astrenes". Astrones? Cosmenes? What is your suggestion?
Is that USA (United States of America) or UST (United States of Terra)? How bout USSSS (United States of Sol)? Hmmm, the USSSS Enterprise (United States of Sol Space Ship).Skipjack wrote:"Major of the US Space Force" has a good ring to it, IMHO, no?
A limited view of well entrenched cultures and bureacracies. The Air Force is already staking out the fight for manned space control, "Aerospace Force" or whatever. My prediction is that they will lose the fight. They are getting too deeply vested in umanned vehicles, both air breathers and not.GIThruster wrote:If we had the kind of disruptive technology seemingly necessary to truly militarizing space--meaning something like M-E physics or other propellantless based that made launch and travel as practical as say, air travel--then many of the distinctions between our services could crumble. Enabling transport so in space, would likewise enable it for all the other services. Some spacecraft would "fly" under the ocean as submarines. So it seems to me possible, even likely, we'd end up with a single Defense Service and either call it that, or perhaps adopt a generic use of the term "Army".KitemanSA wrote:The term "Marines" is just using a foreign language word for "sea" (mar) to label soldiers on the sea. Soldiers in space should thus be termed "astrenes". Astrones? Cosmenes? What is your suggestion?
Ok. I'll bite. I've stayed away from this forum for a while because, frankly, it had degenerated. Seems to be getting back on track. But this I can't resist. You can guess my alma mater.KitemanSA wrote:Sorry, the Air Force is only ~64 years old, while the Navy was there at the beginning and before! Upstart Air Farce!CaptainBeowulf wrote: I don't know... if the navy is able to start building starships, they might be able to put together a solid case to take over the air force. One 90 year old instance of interservice rivalry solved!
Makes a good argument for the creation of the United States Space Navy! Maybe they might recall me to active duty...CaptainBeowulf wrote:I don't know... if the navy is able to start building starships, they might be able to put together a solid case to take over the air force. One 90 year old instance of interservice rivalry solved!