It's a joke
They wouldn't go for it, would they?
A petition asking the Whitehouse to construct a "Death Star", has gathered over 5000 signatures on the American government's ePetition site. The petition 'Secure resources and funding, and begin construction of a Death Star by 2016' was created by a John D of Longmont, Colorado, and has gathered 5,370 signatures in the 3 weeks …
? Its not like there is any doubt abut global warming anymore. In case you have have your head in the sand for a decade or 2 then there is now over whelming observable evidence that a) Global warming is happening, and b) the primary cause is greenhouse gas emissions caused by mankind.
The only thing left to argue about is how bad it will be...
The US government recognises Scientology as a religeon is what i refer to - and gives them the relevant tax exemptions.
Let's not attack strawmen, RICHTO, m-kay? If you read what I wrote (instead of drunk-skimming,) you'll see that the only observation I made about global warming was this: How the fuck could you possibly start a conversation about it in a thread regarding Death Stars?
Last I checked, the IRS != the American people. Unless you honestly believe that ~315 million are in support of Scientology, then maybe you (along with most rational thinkers) can arrive at the correct conclusion that the IRS screwed up. Maybe they're fearful of what would happen if they revoked their tax exempt status.
Now, please take your contrived arguments elsewhere.
im Hill writes:
Jim Hill wrote:
> So, the Nobel prize committee for economics are fools, then.
Just because the Nobel committee picks some random leftist writer with delusions of grandeur doesn't make that writer a genius. Just like giving Obama the Nobel for peace didn't make him stop wars (or start them in the case of Lybia).
You look like you need a religion with saints, icons and an infallible pope or two, yet you don't sound like Catholic material. May I interest you in scientology?
Giving Obama a Nobel prize for peace, essentially because he wasn't George Bush really made the whole concept of Nobel prizes a bit of a joke. It would be even funnier if the big knobs of the EU were made to collect their recently awarded Nobel prize for peace in Athens.
The hostiles arrive and from 2.2 AU, blast the deathstar and render Earth a wasteland. Then, there literally would be no tomorrow, hehehehe. But, it could be a "party like it's 1999", lol...
The only Prince will be an astonmical prince and the prints of darkness from deep space... :-)
Or maybe they've just shown us that they have a sense of humour and you don't?
That's more likely, but then this is the nation where a government agency had to issue a statement saying that mermaids don't actually exist we're talking about.
Seriously though, we DO have a sense of humour here in America. Unfortunately we've also got people who take everything literally. This probably IS a serious petition that grew out of someone's joke about building a Death Star.
The epetition site is a gathering point for crazies. The funny thing is that people would even think that we need to spend trillions to fight Darth Vader when there are millions of people starving to death in this world is beyond anything that I can think. If violence makes a better world, the earth would be a paradise by now. Sad
Ha. Ha. Ha. Hahahahaha. You're really just trying to get that gold badge aren't you? There's no reason you'd post so much obviously contrary/trolling garbage otherwise.
If you want to look into that fact you can log in to El Reg go to 'Formus' at the top right of the page (just left of the search box) and click 'My Posts'
Who do you think pays for the Internet? See the post above that says that even though the U.S. pays all the trolling you do we still give you the right to do so. Suck that in your state paternalism & send me 40 quid for being a good sport and not calling you an first year college douche.
Kinda like most ElReg commentards.
Releasing the trillions spent fending off the dusty goat-herders who have absolutely zero chance of invading North America, and putting that money into rebuilding our schools, hospitals, water & power systems, highways, and the people who live here in general, would be a far better option. IMO, of course.
I guess that's why it's in Bootnotes - the perfect place to waste time and comments.
The idea isn't as stupid as you think (kinda) - a huge investment like this would lower unemployment and the country could work itself out of recession. Maybe start smaller though and build schools and social housing before going large.
> a huge investment like this would lower unemployment and the country could work itself out of recession.
Unfortunately this is NOT how reality works.
The money to paid the guys and the goods to build that has to come from somewhere.
It comes from tax dollars. Or, which is another way of putting, from the printing press.
This makes it impossible for people to buy what they want or desire (a house, a new car, eggs for the fridge) if it's personal tax, and impossible to invest (into jobs or new plant) if it's company tax. Additionally, savings are being destroyed - so future activities will be curtailed, so will pension payouts etc.
In effect, you are burning down the country. It would be just another bubble.
Some people, those very near state, would of course get tremendously rich and powerful as in any command economy.
You could also just build a huge "THING" in the desert and reach the same employment goals you want without threatening the weaponizing of space and really pissed off countries because we violated a lot of treaties.
I agree with your principal. Build things that encourage and enlighten kids. It doesn't have to be schools though. What about museums and planetariums and more publicly available NASA images that get kids started on the path to exploration.
Oh jake, how lovely and naive you are.
Using your way lots of companies make a small amount money and the public benefit
Our way a small number of defence companies make an absolute shed load of money and the company directors and shareholders benefit
Please keep out of our business we know where you live.
Fling crowbars with small guidance packages down the gravity well at them.
Wouldn't it be easier, since we're talking the unlimited power (cheap to zero price electricity and such) of the Empire, to grab a few asteroids, hollow one out, with the others to build it out (laser turrets, and such)?
*figure if everybody's going crazy, better act crazy to fit in. Works with Zombie Apocalypse too (yeah Bill Murray got himself killed, but what are the odds?)
Will it also include the kind of weak spot included in the original that, if you happen to hit with a laser, means the whole thing explodes? It did seem something of an odd feature.
If they do choose to include it, any idea if there's an American company which specialises in including huge vulnerabilities in its products that might be called upon?
There are a lot of people (in the USA and outside of it) that complain about the US space programme; one of the most common complaints is ".. all that money is wasted.." (or similar comments).
The total expenditure on the US space programme since the 1960s works out at about 5 cents per person in the USA per day over that time; are there any sweets (candies) that can still be purchased for that price anymore? (a single strip of gum for example). Most people (in the UK at least) spend more than that every day on using their mobile phone.
Meanwhile, a lot of technology (OK not all, but a lot) has been proven to have applications in many other areas; medicine, engineering, communications, navigation, meterology, amongst others. Many tens of thousands of jobs were created in the public sector, but many hundreds of thousands were created in the private sector (some of them in other countries as well).
Any large scale project of this kind can have a re-vitalising affect on a nation; just think of the feel good factor that came from the Olympics this year.
(A useful discussion can be found here http://www.freakonomics.com/2008/01/11/is-space-exploration-worth-the-cost-a-freakonomics-quorum/)
This may come as a surprise to many Americans but…
You are NOT the world police!
I live in the UK and I’m glad we are not the ones who think that they can over consume and impose their will on the world. I’m also glad we don’t have oil, otherwise we’d be looking at an American invasion sometime soon.
Isn't that HAD lots of oil? There's not a lot left, and the Scots may take those dregs with them when they vote for independance ... and shortly afterwards, get invaded by the USA?
Back in the real world, it's actually the USA that again has lots of oil, thanks to fraccing technology and abundant supplies of oil shale.
"I’m also glad we don’t have oil, otherwise we’d be looking at an American invasion sometime soon."
One small problem with a UK invasion by the yanks: NATO, but...
I for one would not be at all surprised if the US has a contemporary equivalent of 'Plan Red' with some contingency including the Falkland Islands should the anticipated quantities of oil and gas be found (and be commercially viable) by current exploratory drilling (which may not prove to be the case across the board: Link).
They remained unsupportive of the UK's 'claims' during the Falklands War in 1982 and even now they seek to remain in some sense 'neutral' by refusing to acknowledge sovereignty.
Obama wants to encourage 'talks' between Argentina and the UK and he has also backed Argentina's calls for negotiations.
No, I am not a conspiracy theorist, I am just old enough to be a cynic and understand that many, many nations have such contingency plans in place tucked away for a rainy day.
But as for the Death Star, remember Ronald Regan and his Strategic Defense Initiative? No doubt the US still has a thriving spaceborne weapons technology programme, just maybe not a Death Star.
No, we are not the world police, and since Obama came into office, we are being more cautious about inserting ourselves in the role as "police". (Except for ridding the world of Bin Laden and some of his associates and providing NATO air support in Libya and elswhere.
However, allow me to remind you that today is December 7th, Pearl Harbor Day "A day that will live in infamy" when the USA formally joined the Allies in World War Two.
Those who forget their history are doomed to repeat it, apparently, you have forgotten that it was the USA that bailed your collective asses out of a jam back then.
Actually Roosevelt did not ask congress to declare war on Japan till 8th December 1941, the day after Pearl Harbour.
Germany and Italy declared war on America on December 11th. America reciprocated the same day.
By then the war (which had started in 1939) had already been going for nearly 2 years.
And for helping out in a tight spot, I salute you.
"...ridding the world of Bin Laden and some of his associates and providing NATO air support in Libya and elswhere"
And therein lies some awful hypocrisy and self-centered political interests.
Let's not forget that historically the US has at the very least two definitions of terrorism. Apparently killing innocent men, women and children is not OK where the victims are American, but is to be tolerated or indeed supported when it happens to others - think Noraid, Peter King, Tom McBride etc.
"Those who forget their history are doomed to repeat it, apparently, you have forgotten that it was the USA that bailed your collective asses out of a jam back then"
The USA alone did not save the free world nor did it alone save 'our collective asses'. That was achieved by the (Free) French, Poland, Britain, Australia, Canada, South Africa, New Zealand, India et.al. History does not conclude that the US won WW2, that was achieved by the Allies as a whole, and not America alone.
An example which typifies American political sentiment of the day is one General Clark and his desire to be seen as the liberator of Rome and a saviour of the free world following the events of Monte Cassino.
In his quest to liberate an unoccupied Rome, some historians perhaps justifiably argue that he in fact directly contributed to extending the war in his acknowledged lust for glory.
He was more concerned with his little place in history than he was in destroying the German 10th. Not my kind of saviour, nor that of the 36th "Texas" Division at the Rapido.
Now that's only one single example. There are other similar ones to consider, on all sides. But to state that America bailed out the rest of the world alone is absurdly wrong and is an insult to all those who died fighting - of any nationality.
"That was achieved by the (Free) French, Poland, Britain, Australia, Canada, South Africa, New Zealand, India et.al."
I support your overall theme, but you forgot one rather significant nation -- Russia. They weren't heroes, making a deal with Hitler to carve up Poland at the beginning of the war, but they paid a high price in lives and contributed significantly in men and production eventually. Apparently Mr. Hilter didn't get as far in reading history as Napoleon invading Russia.
Perhaps, the next time someone asks for help, the USA should just sit on it's hands like the protectionists want.
No nation is without it's hypocrisy, Britain certainly has exhibited, shall we say "flexible", definitions of terrorism. There are always "individuals" who crave fame and power, all military leaders have similar faults as Patton or Clark or Rommel or Hitler, Stalin or any other.
Perhaps you need to remember actual history though, roughly 13 million Americans served overseas in WW2, 16 million overall. That number is greater than all the other allies combined. That does not count the factory workers or the Merchant Marine that brought food and supplies to Britain.
Once you add to that the sheer number of ordinary US Citizens involved in producing and delivering equipment & food for WW2 and their sacrifices, you might come to the conclusion that you should owe a debt of gratitude to the US for "bailing your collective asses out of a jam".
It is neither absurdly wrong nor is it an insult, it is a statement of fact. Had the USA not entered the war, this would likely be a German speaking website right now. No one said "we one it alone", you inferred that in your own mind, not from my words.
My (GRHS) father served in WW2 as a bombardier/navigator in a B24 and flew out of England and Sicily. He did his best to help win the war even to the point of flying missions after he could have gone home wounded. He didn't ask for any glory, conquests or thanks.
He knew what was right and what was wrong and he did his duty.
You don't need WMD if you've colonised the moon. You just need a mass-driver and a pile of big rocks. The first space war may be fought with (updated) stone-age technology and stone-age military strategy, and will inevitably be won by the moon because it's the really high ground.
Heinlein "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" set this scenario in 2076. 64 years to go. Still just about possible.
I like this initiative by the Americans, they will of course need plenty of English accents around the Death Star once it's complete to give it that authentic feel.
Now, assuming the size of the Death Star is relatively (thats no) moon sized it should create jobs for everyone in the UK.
What could possibly go wrong....?
The scary thing about America is that year on year of its existance its been involved in more genocides either directly or indirectly than any other nation on the planet (even Russia) - look it up, its actually true (US arms actually help Stalin get at least 3 under way). Couple that with military tacticians that make the cloned offsping of Lord Chelmsford, Lord Rust and General Ephinstone (of Afghanistan 'fame') look talented, and you have a Casserene/Little Big Horn waiting to happen... With turbolasers.
Personally I feel nervous when I see America eying the plastic travel cutlery displays, let alone offensive weapons.
I'm really happy I'm not a soldier too, since while having the French as allies historically meant your right flank tended to resemble a large cloud of dust moving at speed to the rear - the average American is the only person on the planet whos known for shooting his allies in the front (and even has a code for when it invariably happens).
The scariest part of the lot, is that there will be some people who actually think this idea is genuine... And will be disappointed when it doesnt happen, real disappointed.
"Well a bunch of desert dwelling "freedom fighters" in robes could fly an aircraft into it and due to some cost saving code violations in the thermal protection have it be completely destroyed."
Sorry, are we still discussing Jemmas twin towers?
The Reagan initiated Star War's program in the 80's did for Communism, economic recession, Arthur Scargil and the Miners strike, flared trousers, sunday closing, free school meals and created 1000s of kim dot com billionaires , Xfactor judges, The Smiths, the iPod, reinvented religious intolerance solved the oil crisis and lead to the word wide domination of home furnishing supplier Ikea, so what not to like.
Interesting petition but hardly original. A number of us participated in an exhaustive discussion of the politico-economics of deathstars in http://www.overthinkingit.com/2011/04/25/star-wars-death-star-economics/. I came away from that with the feeling that whether death star construction was a good investment or not had more to do with the economic patterns and organization among star systems, not on the direct benefits of construction contracts and hiring all those storm troopers, even if you figure in construction of shield generators and garrisoning small forest moons. In fact, the discussion was such a smashup discussion that the readers of overthinkingit voted it the most popular discussion of 2011.
Although I myself lack and seek a job as I like choices that income brings I think jobs are a bit over rated. Being useful can be accomplished without pay; getting a living COULD be accomplished without EVERYONE working, and it should be IMHO. But there are other good possibilities here, besides jobs.
Attracting minds to innovation may be a good thing in itself. Technology to make use of off-Earth resources and to make off-Earth habitation plausible is fundamentally necessary. People could already end civilization and possibly humanity if they chose to, so far, we have not; another means to that end would not change that.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019