Free TECHNOIR by John Lasker

would have to build hundreds of Battlesats or killer satellites; then you have to launch them, which is also an incredibly expensive endeavor.
                At first, it appeared there was a president in the White House who doesn’t believe in space dominance. President Obama declared during his campaign he would cut “unproven missile” defense and to “never weaponize space.” Those keeping a close eye on the weaponization of space rejoiced like other peace activists did during those heady days. Again, the world’s newest savior was going to keep the peace in Earth’s lower orbits.
                But there’s a twist. Obama was Congress’s top recipient from missile defense contractors during the 2008 election cycle, according to Opensecrets.com , which monitors money’s influence on US elections and public policy. Obama was given $377,000, while Sen. McCain was a distance second, receiving $221,000. And for the first time since 1994, Congressional Democrats in 2008 took more money from the missile defense industry than Republicans. The Democrats were handed $4.6 million, while the Republicans were given $4.5 million.
                During Obama’s campaign in the summer of 2008, Poland agreed in principle, but did not commit, to allow within its borders a US missile defense battery loaded with kinetic interceptors that can shoot down satellites. The move infuriated Russia and raised the specter of the Cold War. This prompted President Vladimir Putin to say US missile defense outposts so close to Russia will “upset…the nuclear balance.” This is missile defense, so what did he exactly mean by upsetting the nuclear balance? Simple. The kinetic interceptors that are planned to be based in Poland weigh 21,000 kg. They are also nearly as long as the Minute Man III, which make up a significant portion of the US’s nuclear arsenal. They also roughly share the same diameter as the proposed interceptor. If the US were to secretly put a nuclear warhead within the interceptor – which technically it could do – it would have a range of 6,000 kilometers. The proposed interceptor base in Poland is just a few hundred kilometers away from the Russian border. By 2009, however, the possibility of US missile defense batteries in Poland was squashed by the Obama administration. The heat with Russia cooled, for the time being.
                Nevertheless, US missile defense plans remain foggy. For FY (fiscal year) 2009, and for the first time since 1993, a small amount of money ($5 million) was approved by the US Congress to study the prospect of “Space-Based Interceptors”, or killer satellites. Also for FY 2009, the Defense  Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), in its request for funding, said they were seeking “the ability to neutralize man-made space environments.”
                “It is a bold declaration that DARPA will be researching ways in which to affect other countries’ efforts in space,” said Victoria Samson, a space weapons expert with the Center for Defense Information. “By doing this sort of research under the radar, the Pentagon obviously figures it’s easier to ask for forgiveness rather than permission.”
              Will President Obama keep his promise of cutting missile defense research and to never weaponize space, or will super-rich missile defense contractors have too much influence over the new President and Congress? It sure appears as if missile defense contractors such as Lockheed Martin have Obama on their puppet strings. For FY 2010, the Obama administration only cut $1.2 billion off the missile defense budget and the overall total remains around $10 billion – roughly the same yearly average total spent during the Bush administration. Then for FY 2011, Obama actually raised the missile defense budget by roughly $500 million from the previous year. Indeed, missile defense advocates breathed a sigh of relief; one