US lawmaker alerts the public to a new Russian doomsday device

US Representative Mike Turner, the Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, issued a chilling warning, stating that Russia has obtained a new kind of weapon that presents an existential threat to the US. Following his warning, he urged President Joe Biden to declassify all relevant information about this threat right away so that the US, Congress, and US allies could cooperate to counter it. As soon as the story spread like wildfire over the world, politicians, both Democrat and Republican, denounced Turner's decision to publicly reveal this anonymous threat as a foolish attempt to incite fear. Since then, further information about this Russian threat has surfaced, and although Turner's assessment was correct, the threat is now far less serious. more than initially depicted. More information has surfaced since Turner's disastrous tweet, or "xeet," which revealed that Russia's new weapon is an anti-satellite weapon. Considering how heavily the US military depends on satellites for everything from communications to reconnaissance, this is a serious cause for concern. The US military is a highly responsive, fast-moving, and adaptable danger since it possesses the greatest space network in the world, second only to China. America's satellites serve as relay links for the country's enormous fleet of unmanned aerial, ground, and marine vehicles and enable it to exchange intelligence swiftly and coordinate the actions of various military forces both within the same theatre and internationally. However, despite all the benefits that come with America's dominance in space, it has been compared to the United States building a magnificent glass home prior to the discovery of the rock. The increasingly modernising near-peer adversaries, such as China and Russia, who already possess classical anti-satellite weapons in the form of missiles and lasers, pose a serious threat to America's satellite infrastructure. Even while the Space Force is attempting to strengthen satellite infrastructure, it is still difficult to fully secure these platforms from the variety of dangers they encounter, some of which can be as straightforward as slowing them down to the point where they disintegrate and fall out of orbit. Now, Russia has increased the stakes in the most unintelligent and ultimately Russian way imaginable. Conventional methods of attacking satellites are limited to hitting one satellite at a time and need extreme precision. With more than 8,000 satellites in orbit and the US's capacity to use civilian satellites as a launching pad, it would take a massive number of satellite destructions all at once to seriously impair America's space-based network. This is where Russia's weapon enters the picture, and it presents such a serious threat that Representative Turner invited other Congressmen to attend a confidential briefing to examine all of the existing intelligence on it. Although specifics are still under wraps, it is quite likely that Russia is developing a weapon that will use a powerful electromagnetic pulse, or EMP, to take down US satellites. Specialised equipment can be used to generate EMPs; the United States, for instance, has successfully tested a weapon that can launch missiles. Targeted EMP strikes can even target individual floors of a structure in order to disable electrical equipment in designated locations. Given that the broad adoption of electronics defines every aspect of our lives and the military's ability to wage war, the electromagnetic menace poses a severe challenge to modern economies and their forces. EMP weapons have the added advantage of not resulting in any human casualties since they can successfully destroy enemy equipment without the need for physical attack by frying circuits due to electromagnetic energy overloads. It's unclear whether Russia is able to create a weapon that can cover a large enough region with an EMP blast on its own, or if the weapon is comparable to the covert US EMP weapon that can blast particular locations where electromagnetic radiation is present. It is known that the nuclear bomb, a weapon that Russia has long mastered and has many of in its arsenal, can easily cause an EMP blast. A nuclear weapon can detonate and emit a large, yet brief, electromagnetic energy pulse that can cover up to 1,000 square kilometres when in orbit. This provides a Russian nuclear bomb with a large area of destruction where it can take out multiple US satellites at once. A typical communications satellite's skin can survive a lot of electromagnetic radiation, however holes and antennae allow radiation from EMPs to enter the inside of the space. Numerous vehicles built for use in a nuclear war zone are protected from electromagnetic pulses (EMPs) on the ground. However, it is unknown how feasible or cost-effective it would be to provide the same level of security for satellites in orbit. In addition to costing thousands of dollars to launch, each extra pound of cargo that must be put into orbit uses more fuel, reducing the satellite's lifespan. Russia could easily produce a weapon similar to this one, even though US intelligence has confirmed that it does not yet have any operational EMP weapons of this kind. Though Russian nuclear weapons have caused a global panic on social media, there is no proof that this is the case—at least not yet. Nevertheless, all that would actually be necessary for Russia to field this capacity overnight is putting a putting a nuclear bomb on a rocket and launching it into a high enough orbit—something they could do with ease considering their capacity for space launches. Two years ago, the response to the question, "Would Russia actually do this?" would have been a resounding no. Nevertheless, current affairs have demonstrated that Vladimir Putin's ignorance truly knows no bounds. Notwithstanding a strong incentive to do so, no country has ever sent WMDs into orbit due to the United Nations' space treaty. Nukes in space offered a clear strategic advantage even before satellites became a problem, since they would cut delivery times in half and greatly lower the likelihood of interception. There wouldn't be a rocket. to intercept during the pre-separation or boost phase, and there would be minimal to no alertness for an impending attack. Depending on the launch complex and the target, Americans could have anywhere from fifteen minutes to thirty minutes' notice of a Soviet strike when using standard ICBMs. Americans would have only a few minutes' notice to get ready for a global Fallout LARP experience, with satellites circling overhead. Significantly lessening the warning and "flight" time would also make interception much more challenging. This contract has endured for many years, even during the most dire periods of the Cold War, but because of Putin, it might end badly. But how horrible would it actually be, and would Russia really do this? In a As part of Operation Fishbowl, the US conducted a number of high-altitude experiments in an attempt to better understand the effects and applications of nuclear bombs. It completed six high-altitude experiments by 1958, but inadequate equipment left US scientists with more questions than answers. The US planned to carry out its biggest high altitude test to yet in 1962, launching a 1.4 to 1.45 Megaton weapon 250 miles above the surface of the planet. The explosion that followed had many more repercussions than initially anticipated. In addition to embarrassing every UFO in the area, the explosion caused a fleeting second sun to appear over the South Pacific. The anticipated EMP explosion proved to be far more bigger than anticipated and so strong that it overpowered the devices meant to record the explosion on Earth. Almost a thousand miles away from the explosion, 300 street lights in Hawaii went out, setting off burglar alarms and causing damage to the electrical grid. The local phone company's microwave link was sufficiently damaged to prevent communications between Kauai and the other islands. Of the few dozen satellites in orbit at the time, nine were damaged by the blast, including the first satellite ever launched by Britain. In addition to altering the Van Allen radiation belt, which serves as a buffer against charged particles, the explosion also produced additional radiation belts surrounding the planet. Cast aside by the sun. Both US and Soviet observers were taken aback by the results, as they had greatly overestimated the strength and volume of the electromagnetic pulse produced in space. It quickly became evident that space-based nuclear weapons could be a fatal threat to future military operations due to their impact on satellites in orbit. Even at lower altitudes, the Soviets would carry out their own space-based experiments that would harm a power plant and ground-based electronics. It was established that nuclear weapons might be used in a completely new way to destroy large portions of an adversary's contemporary electronic infrastructure. We have only grown more susceptible to space-based EMPs since then. In fact, early vacuum tube technology was highly resilient to electromagnetic pulses (EMPs). However, modern semiconductors are incredibly brittle. An EMP blast would be especially effective against low-Earth orbit satellites as an anti-satellite weapon. Satellites must be shielded from charged particles in space at higher orbits that are above the earth's electromagnetic field. Nevertheless, manufacturers take advantage of this protection by omitting hardening in lower earth orbits and firmly inside the earth's warm magnetic embrace, which would ultimately result in an increase in weight and expense. However, the issue extends beyond electronically burned satellites, as the explosion itself clearly did significant damage. Since there isn't much medium in space to convey a shockwave, this would really be greatly reduced, but the hazard to neighbouring satellites could cause a destructor event that goes unchecked, called Kessler syndrome. This occurs when there is an excessive amount of space debris produced, which then begins to ruin other space assets and adds to the debris cloud. Space travel eventually becomes too risky because there will be so much space debris in orbit around the Earth that it will be impossible to forecast every orbit. Space debris may take decades or perhaps centuries to deorbit on its own, trapping humanity on this rock with Elon Musk. So, the question is: Is Russia truly that stupid to carry out this action? Immediately, the concern is that any weapon of mass devastation launched into orbit would violate the United Nations space treaty. Retaliating, other countries that already have WMDs would launch their own nuclear weapons into space to prevent themselves from being attacked. But once the taboo was broken, the non-WMD weaponization of space would start in earnest, greatly raising the possibility of a Kessler Syndrome incident. all because Putin was dejected at his defeat in Ukraine. And that's the main goal of this new anti-satellite weapon. Frequent to the point of complete monotony, Russia always brings out its old nuclear weapon and begins to rattle it whenever it faces a significant defeat in Ukraine or when a significant arms transfer from the West is about to occur. The tactic works well in making Westerners reluctant to arm Ukraine, as seen by the significant historical reluctance to do so in the two years since the conflict started. The announcement of this test is probably just another anger tantrum intended to scare the American public, as the US Congress is on the verge of reaching an agreement that would allow billions of dollars in assistance for Ukraine. Additionally, there is cause for concern that Representative Mike Turner purposefully disclosed information about this threat. Even though he has been a major supporter of aid to Ukraine, Trump allies in the Republican Party, such as Speaker Mike Johnson, a denier of elections, have deliberately ruined funding agreements in order to create problems for the former president to campaign on. Turner is thought to have disclosed this information to push for action against Russia and pass financing for Ukraine because he was impatient with the months-long delay in reaching a financial agreement. However, would Russia really make advantage of this? weaponry? An enormous EMP blast has one drawback: it is uncontrollable. Ground effects could be avoided or much reduced at a sufficient height, but Russia's space-based infrastructure would all be at danger. Everything would be in danger of being destroyed by EMP bursts produced by nuclear weapons, which are incapable of distinguishing between Chinese or American satellites and the potatoes with duct-taped cell phones that Russia most likely has in space. Furthermore, the presence of foreign entities and substantial civilian infrastructure virtually guarantees that Russia would never deploy this weapon. The world, including China, which currently possesses the second-largest space network, would be incensed about any unrestrained use of anti-satellite weapons in space. Russia would lose every surviving partner it currently has and grow into an even bigger international pariah than it was before. China may even decide to take military action against Russian soldiers in response to the incident, fearing more nuclear escalation or adventurism. Ultimately, this kind of weapon serves more as a strategic disincentive than a weapon—a way to make an adversary think twice before striking you since doing so would be extremely expensive.