New comedy "Space Force" from the makers of The Office
- Thread starter Romulan_spy
- Start date
I am not a big fan of Alex Baldwin's version of Trump. I much preferred Darrell Hammond's version. Of course it would also depend on what kind of Trump are they going far. A exact copy for a few jokes or a full fledged character with a little more depth or a twist. Like maybe this version of Trump is really a alien if they are going to do a more Sci-FI take or maybe Trump is literally a Russian spy in that he talks with a Russian accent and talks about his days in Russia as a kid o and as soon as a camera shows up he goes into full Trump mode as we the public know him.
Jason
I'm not a fan of either of those two Trump impressions. Or rather, Hammond's was better at the mannerisms, but Baldwin's is better at characterizing Trump. Early in the campaign when Trump was running ads saying we should ban all Muslims from the country, all Hammond's impression did was bully Jeb Bush.
For this show I think Trump should be an offscreen character, or maybe he should only show up on the show through characters reacting to tweets.
For this show I think Trump should be an offscreen character, or maybe he should only show up on the show through characters reacting to tweets.
I fear this series will be just another slap in the face of space advocates.
The problem I have with this comedy is that space advocates in the military have long been under the thumbs of fighter jocks.
If you are a space advocate--you rank below the janitor at the Pentagon
Ironically--the military acknowledges AGW, and some want space solar power:
https://www.nrdc.org/onearth/military-takes-climate-change-seriously-why-wont-commander-chief
https://www.thespaceshow.com/guest/dr.-m.v.-coyote-smith-col-usaf-ret
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/3656/1
The duties of the space warfighter have long been divvied up under other branches of the service
There were those in the USAF that showed hostility to the GPS
https://scpnt.stanford.edu/news/age-aerospace-tv-documentary
When it comes to spy-sats, there is the story of the National Photographic Interpretation Center (NPIC, or “enpic”) : http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2966/1
NPIC and its imagery analysts were not at the top of the pecking order in the secretive world of spooks. Many people at the CIA and other agencies looked down on them as primarily providers of data, not real analysts....NPIC. ...gained stature within the intelligence community. They had demonstrated once again that satellite imagery, and imagery alone, could provide answers that other intelligence sources could not.
For too long, fighter-jocks and carrier groupies, blue-suits and spooks all took shots at space advocates in the military. The USAF showed real arrogance toward giving soldiers on the ground fire support:
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...wing-film-about-the-a-10-it-tried-to-suppress
It is not enough that a new Space Force be under the USAF, as the Marines are under the USN--and getting the dregs of the budget as a result:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/whos-minding-the-nuclear-weapons/
The former missileers told us that the missile corps has long been treated like the step child of the Air Force. Pilots get all the glory; missileers have fewer chances for advancement.
https://arstechnica.com/information...find-8-inch-floppies-drive-nuclear-deterrent/
Now the concept of the nuclear triad is under threat. many call for land forces to be killed of--with ballistic missile subs and bombers taking over.
The problem I have is that neither system can have dual use, as ICBMs that can serve as Launch Vehicles--perhaps used against asteroids: https://www.cnn.com/2016/02/19/politics/russia-icbm-asteroid-killer/index.html
I want the solid rocket industry to have something like the Athena III--SRB based missiles which can launch spysats on a moment's notice, a spacecraft to an ʻOumuamua type transient astronomical event. Submarine launched ballistic missiles are no good--and have no dual use.
The idea is to have larger LVs in silos that can launch in a moment's notice--that don't need to have LOX/liquid filling delays--but can be ready on stand-by:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athena_(rocket_family)#Athena_III
Space Advocates need their own service. The USAF, on the other hand, needs to be abolished and remanded back under the heel of the Army: https://www.kentuckypress.com/live/title_detail.php?titleid=3719#.XHmm7olKiUk
In truth, spaceflight should have have made aviation as obsolete as aviation made the battleship--though some might question that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Gambier_Bay
In Russia, the two big technocrats were Korolyov and Glushko. In the USA, it was LeMay and Rickover who got the blank checks, not space advocates.
In Russia, missileers presided over all R-7 launches--rockets being artillery. In the US, we had the Army Ballistic Missile Agency. Sadly that--and the Saturns were killed off:
"As ABMA commander John B. Medaris put it:"
By this time, my nose was beginning to sniff a strange odor of "fish." I put my bird dogs to work to try to find out what was going on and with whom we had to compete. We discovered that the Air Force had proposed a wholly different and entirely new vehicle as the booster for Dynasoar, using a cluster of Titan engines and upgrading their performance to get the necessary first-stage thrust for take-off. This creature was variously christened the Super Titan, or the Titan C. No work had been done on this vehicle other than a hasty engineering outline. Yet the claim was made that the vehicle in a two-stage or three-stage configuration could be flown more quickly than the Saturn, on which we had already been working hard for many months. Dates and estimates were attached to that proposal which at best ignored many factors of costs, and at worst were strictly propaganda.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn_I#Near-cancellation
If I can strike a target from space, then why do I need the huge WWII/Cold War logistical nightmare that is America's force projection empire? If I can target a site deep udergroud from space, why do I even need an Air Force?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment
People on the Right, who make a lot of money on the logistics needed for force projection--feel threatened by space. Folks on the Left just think the Space Force is just Trump's foolishness--without knowing the real history. "We can't stop fighters and ships--so let's nix this Trump thing"
One side is interested in social programs, the other, tax breaks. Both tell space advocates "no" just for different reasons.
This need not be the case:
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/3621/1
Rather than being a "brain drain," SDI allowed smaller craft like Clementine to exist:
https://www.wired.com/2015/02/strategic-defense-military-uses-moon-asteroid-resources-1983/
Where the private firms struggled early on:
https://arstechnica.com/science/201...-reality-armadillo-aerospace-on-life-support/
....SDI tech like the thrusters seen here:
---Allowed finer control of automated spacecraft. The skycrane likely resulted from such cross-pollination
There were some who questioned the use of Russia's space firsts:
https://www.publishersweekly.com/978-0-471-02031-8
Thanks to sentiments like Sagdeev's, Russian spaceflight has waned:
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/3611/1
In a recent article, Russian space expert....referred to a poem by Sergey Zhukov, a cosmonaut trainee, spaceflight advocate, and high official.
Troubled by their crumbling space program, several years ago Zhukov wrote a poem entitled “Epitaph for the Russian Space Agency (1992–2015).” Oberg’s translation of Zhukov’s poem perfectly describes what has happened to the Russian planetary space exploration program:
The students flowed westward
The doctors - who is in China, who in Iran?
Only the movie film’s yellowed tape
Preserved the prestige of Russians.
Erecting a heap of paper,
Our officialdom grew sickly and shallow…
And he stands, in tears,
On the threshold of the universe, the poet.
He looks through opened eyes
Into deep space, and there are no Russians there…
The problem I have with this comedy is that space advocates in the military have long been under the thumbs of fighter jocks.
If you are a space advocate--you rank below the janitor at the Pentagon
Ironically--the military acknowledges AGW, and some want space solar power:
https://www.nrdc.org/onearth/military-takes-climate-change-seriously-why-wont-commander-chief
https://www.thespaceshow.com/guest/dr.-m.v.-coyote-smith-col-usaf-ret
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/3656/1
The duties of the space warfighter have long been divvied up under other branches of the service
There were those in the USAF that showed hostility to the GPS
https://scpnt.stanford.edu/news/age-aerospace-tv-documentary
When it comes to spy-sats, there is the story of the National Photographic Interpretation Center (NPIC, or “enpic”) : http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2966/1
NPIC and its imagery analysts were not at the top of the pecking order in the secretive world of spooks. Many people at the CIA and other agencies looked down on them as primarily providers of data, not real analysts....NPIC. ...gained stature within the intelligence community. They had demonstrated once again that satellite imagery, and imagery alone, could provide answers that other intelligence sources could not.
For too long, fighter-jocks and carrier groupies, blue-suits and spooks all took shots at space advocates in the military. The USAF showed real arrogance toward giving soldiers on the ground fire support:
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...wing-film-about-the-a-10-it-tried-to-suppress
It is not enough that a new Space Force be under the USAF, as the Marines are under the USN--and getting the dregs of the budget as a result:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/whos-minding-the-nuclear-weapons/
The former missileers told us that the missile corps has long been treated like the step child of the Air Force. Pilots get all the glory; missileers have fewer chances for advancement.
https://arstechnica.com/information...find-8-inch-floppies-drive-nuclear-deterrent/
Now the concept of the nuclear triad is under threat. many call for land forces to be killed of--with ballistic missile subs and bombers taking over.
The problem I have is that neither system can have dual use, as ICBMs that can serve as Launch Vehicles--perhaps used against asteroids: https://www.cnn.com/2016/02/19/politics/russia-icbm-asteroid-killer/index.html
I want the solid rocket industry to have something like the Athena III--SRB based missiles which can launch spysats on a moment's notice, a spacecraft to an ʻOumuamua type transient astronomical event. Submarine launched ballistic missiles are no good--and have no dual use.
The idea is to have larger LVs in silos that can launch in a moment's notice--that don't need to have LOX/liquid filling delays--but can be ready on stand-by:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athena_(rocket_family)#Athena_III
Space Advocates need their own service. The USAF, on the other hand, needs to be abolished and remanded back under the heel of the Army: https://www.kentuckypress.com/live/title_detail.php?titleid=3719#.XHmm7olKiUk
In truth, spaceflight should have have made aviation as obsolete as aviation made the battleship--though some might question that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Gambier_Bay
In Russia, the two big technocrats were Korolyov and Glushko. In the USA, it was LeMay and Rickover who got the blank checks, not space advocates.
In Russia, missileers presided over all R-7 launches--rockets being artillery. In the US, we had the Army Ballistic Missile Agency. Sadly that--and the Saturns were killed off:
"As ABMA commander John B. Medaris put it:"
By this time, my nose was beginning to sniff a strange odor of "fish." I put my bird dogs to work to try to find out what was going on and with whom we had to compete. We discovered that the Air Force had proposed a wholly different and entirely new vehicle as the booster for Dynasoar, using a cluster of Titan engines and upgrading their performance to get the necessary first-stage thrust for take-off. This creature was variously christened the Super Titan, or the Titan C. No work had been done on this vehicle other than a hasty engineering outline. Yet the claim was made that the vehicle in a two-stage or three-stage configuration could be flown more quickly than the Saturn, on which we had already been working hard for many months. Dates and estimates were attached to that proposal which at best ignored many factors of costs, and at worst were strictly propaganda.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn_I#Near-cancellation
If I can strike a target from space, then why do I need the huge WWII/Cold War logistical nightmare that is America's force projection empire? If I can target a site deep udergroud from space, why do I even need an Air Force?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment
People on the Right, who make a lot of money on the logistics needed for force projection--feel threatened by space. Folks on the Left just think the Space Force is just Trump's foolishness--without knowing the real history. "We can't stop fighters and ships--so let's nix this Trump thing"
One side is interested in social programs, the other, tax breaks. Both tell space advocates "no" just for different reasons.
This need not be the case:
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/3621/1
Rather than being a "brain drain," SDI allowed smaller craft like Clementine to exist:
https://www.wired.com/2015/02/strategic-defense-military-uses-moon-asteroid-resources-1983/
Where the private firms struggled early on:
https://arstechnica.com/science/201...-reality-armadillo-aerospace-on-life-support/
....SDI tech like the thrusters seen here:
---Allowed finer control of automated spacecraft. The skycrane likely resulted from such cross-pollination
There were some who questioned the use of Russia's space firsts:
https://www.publishersweekly.com/978-0-471-02031-8
Thanks to sentiments like Sagdeev's, Russian spaceflight has waned:
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/3611/1
In a recent article, Russian space expert....referred to a poem by Sergey Zhukov, a cosmonaut trainee, spaceflight advocate, and high official.
Troubled by their crumbling space program, several years ago Zhukov wrote a poem entitled “Epitaph for the Russian Space Agency (1992–2015).” Oberg’s translation of Zhukov’s poem perfectly describes what has happened to the Russian planetary space exploration program:
The students flowed westward
The doctors - who is in China, who in Iran?
Only the movie film’s yellowed tape
Preserved the prestige of Russians.
Erecting a heap of paper,
Our officialdom grew sickly and shallow…
And he stands, in tears,
On the threshold of the universe, the poet.
He looks through opened eyes
Into deep space, and there are no Russians there…
Last edited: