f Air Force Secretary James Roche on the massive space capability of the U.S. military, a view that is characteristic of the strident and unapologetic demeanor of U.S. officials on military superiority: ôIf allies donÆt like the new paradigm of space dominance, theyÆll just have to learn to accept it. They will be given æno veto power.Æö
JohnsonÆs (2004) main argument is that the Republican military-industrial complex agenda includes complete and total space dominance, the ability to single-handedly dominate every other country on the planet. This ability also encompasses, in JohnsonÆs (2004) view, and increasing desire of imperialism, one that is largely driven by economic self-interest but masked behind the fear of terrorism. While others may agree with this view, the U.S. at the present time seems committed to gun-boat diplomacy in the form of space planes that will completely dominate any current or future enemy. As General Blaisdell also asserted in his press conference, ôThe synergy with air, land and sea forces and our ability to control the battle space and seize the high ground is devastating,ö (U.S., 2003, p. 1).
Despite the contentions of Chalmers Johnson, military officials and Bush administration officials maintains that the increased buildup of the military and new weaponry aimed at achieving space dominance are required to assure national security. Undeniably, should the new space dominance policy be achieved, there will be a number of benefits that accrue to the U.S. From the saving of troops lives to the ability to prevent attacks on the U.S. in space, space dominance permits the U.S. enormous capability for military dominance and success. Detection of launched missiles, the ability to intercept missiles, and the collection of data through global positioning systems (GPS) and communications technologies are only a few of the benefits offered by a system expected to cost approximately $10 billion o...