E.U. Agrees To Launch Galileo Satellite Location System 1318
waimate writes "The European Union today decided to go ahead with Galileo, the constellation of 30 satellites which will compete with the U.S. GPS system.
The U.S. abolished selective availability three years ago partly to make GPS more useful for all mankind, but also to dissuade other countries from developing their own navigational satellite system, and thus be dependant on the U.S. for both peaceful and military purposes. Since the demise of the Russian GLONASS system, GPS is the only game in town. Evidently recent events make Europe feel less comfortable about such things, and so they're building their own. Good thing for commercialization of space, or bad thing for world peace?"
Remember the Russian GPS Blockers? (Score:1, Interesting)
Waste of Resources (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Welcome back to Superpower Politics (Score:2, Interesting)
Superpower? They have a lot of internal divisions and disagreements to deal with before they get to that level.
and it is unsurprising that it is seeking independence of technical material.
I think the European GPS is a waste of money. Unless they anticipate a U.S. vs Europe war then I don't see this is the best use of limited resources.
On the up side I think it'll be cool if we see GPS receivers that receive BOTH signals and can use the combined data of both systems to produce an even more accurate fix.
Free VS Fee (Score:1, Interesting)
Great Name (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:It serves us right (Score:3, Interesting)
Jingoism continues to cloud people's thinking.
Re:I think it's a good thing (Score:3, Interesting)
Clearly a system of satellites that provide location data will be an excellent counter to US military supremacy. After this coup, no doubt the EU will look into building the 'Euronet' (aka the 'Information Autobahn') to futher counter US hegemony. Rumsfeld is likely shaking in his boots.
Note that I'm no fan of the current US administration, but to suggest that creating a European version of GPS is some great step towards making the EU a 'relevant' force in world politics (by which I mean a force capable of doing ~anything~) seems a tad laughable.
Re:I think it's a good thing (Score:3, Interesting)
Maybe because you're wrong? There are all kinds of arguments I could make regarding the war. However, I agree with one of the previous posters that this has more to do with American power in general. The Eurocrats are jealous of the fact that the U.S. has the power to act in its own interest with or without anyone's help, which makes them feel particularly irrelevant. Their response to this irrelevancy is to form a more federal E.U. with a common foreign policy and a single currency, with the ultimate goal of being a superpower counterweight to the U.S.
Re:It's not just about challenging the US military (Score:5, Interesting)
You haven't ever met an AW guy then? Believe me, these guys are so anally retentive it's unbelivable - they would consider 2 feet to be dangerously out of spec. This is one of the reasons why planes don't land on GPS, or INS, they do so with the Mk.1 eyeball or ILS - both of which are rather accurate and capable of landing a plane right on the centerline - which _is_ required to save your life should you have a tire go, especially in a 747 landing at a normal airport.
Re:It serves us right (Score:3, Interesting)
Don't even need to read the rest of the thread.
Re:It's not just about challenging the US military (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:It serves us right (Score:3, Interesting)
Oh, right... so basically we are trying to bring democracy to Iraq, but we do not tolerate dissent on such decision. Yup, it sound totally democratic to me!
BTW. All those people who were laughing at the French, have no idea of how much we owe to them (in the same manner they owe to us), they have never purchased French products (no French fries are not actually made in France, duh!), and at the same time they laugh at French courage... their little bitch asses have never experienced a war (no, playing FPS on your computer doesn't count as actual battle experience)... and I would like to see them laugh at French courage in front of a platoon of French Legionaires... yeah, see how much fun those "surrender monkeys" have kicking your ass. Remember who rescued all those American school children a few years ago from central Africa, no it was not the super duper US special forces... it was *gasp* the French.
please explain... (Score:2, Interesting)
Please explain how this extraordiary expensive Gallileo system would have stopped US action in Iraq.
ultimately staged an invasion rather than liberation
Are you saying that you think that it would have been better if the US had stayed out of Iraq?
Or are you one of those who before the war opposed US action, and after realized that it was better than the alternative, but refrain from saying so and rather complain on those things that went wrong or did not happen as Pentagon predicted...? It's weak, but at least you have plenty of company.
Tor
Re:It serves us right (Score:1, Interesting)
People today immigrate to the US for one reason - money. They can earn more here than anywhere else in the world, and even when the economy is in the toilet there are still more jobs available here than in the countries people emigrate from.
However, many people are seriously considering emigrating *from* the US. Why? Because the fucking Christians are making it impossible to be anything else. The fucking politicians are signing away every freedom and every right in the name of "security". And the decline of the Republic has begun, as we slide ever-deeper in the Bread and Circuses department. Next comes Empire and oppression.
If you're happy on your couch drinking your watered beer, attending your hypocrit church, watching The Man Show and HBO and occaisionally turning on Cimemax for a cheap thrill, and you don't care about the freedoms that made the US great in the first place, then by all means stick around. Don't open your eyes. Don't pay attention to the opinions of others. No one will force you. No one will make you use your mind or protect your freedoms. Just keep enjoying your bread and watching the circuses and voting for the same worthless candidates.
Re:It serves us right (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:I think it's a good thing (Score:5, Interesting)
In practice, American arrogance is altogether ridiculous, and given recent and past behaviour, the US is, I would say, more than likely to do things like break GPS leaving everyone else in the lurch.
Contrary to what you may believe, the interest in a common EU isn't in competing with the US. You never know, there's a danger it may be that it's the best for all of Europe, and Europe knows it, and that's why we're doing it.
We would all love to get together with the US, and provide various decent global systems... But the US simply keeps proving that it isn't trustworthy.
Flamebait, I'm sure. But The arrogance I've witnessed in the 8 months since I moved here is beyond anything I had ever been able to imagine it would be. And yes, I'm pissed and even embarrassed to be an American citizen.
Gary (-;
Re:Great Name (Score:1, Interesting)
This utterly impractical system has, with the the substitution of satellites for ships, and radio waves for cannons, turned out to be the right solution after all.
Cake, eating of and having of (Score:5, Interesting)
Then Europe roundly condemned us for not joining in WW II fast enough, even tho that too was a purely European matter which was in fact jump started by the disastrous treaty, drafted by France, which ended WW I.
Not to mention that while Roosevelt was trying to help the Chinese, who Japan had invaded in 1931 and 1937, the Europeans couldn't be bothered with some trifle so far away.
Then the Suez canal fiasco, where Egypt nationalized that wonder of colonial days, Britain and France invaded to take it back
And who told the French that trying to recover Indochina after WW II ended was a mistake? Duhh
Then there's the Balkans again, 1990s, couple of purely European wars there
And where were the Dayton Accords signed? Hmmmm
Now I personally am not a big fan of Bush, or either gulf war. But by gum, the UN signed up in 1991 to cleanup Iraq, put in sanctions, rid it of the big nasty weapons
I personally am sick and tired of saving Eurpoe's ass. WW I, WW II, Suez, Balkans
Re:It's not just about challenging the US military (Score:3, Interesting)
Receiver 1 is fixed. It is hooked into a computer system that outputs correction data in real time (RTK or real time kinematic), radio recievers coupled with another GPS receiver provide spatially correct location for both Horizontal (XY) and Vertical (Z). Many companies provide solutions for individual-level tracking.
Trimble [trimble.com]
Leica [leica-geosystems.com]
Re:World peace? (Score:5, Interesting)
I somehow doubt that the ultimate motivation for the system is for guiding bombs. Yes, of course it's a factor, but Europeans seem to be culturally more opposed to war than the US.
So, if the U.S. is in the middle of combat, and turns off public GPS to thwart emeny guided bombs, I can imagine a bunch of European beaurocrats sitting in Brussels trying to decide whether or not they should do the same.
Well, perhaps this will make the US think twice before going off to wage war that most of the rest of the world opposes. If Europe should choose to go to war (not very likely), I think that the decision would be made easily (if it will be possible to achieve at all).
Is it somehow better to have absolute power in the hands of some kid trying to play dad?
Re:World peace? (Score:2, Interesting)
Exchange "GPS" with "Galileo" and ask yourself if the US military would accept relying on a system over which they would not have control.
Summary (Score:2, Interesting)
Just to sum up this discussion so far:
Europeans: There is a need for a european GPS system. The US has proved itself to be rather unpredictable and who knows what they might do in a tight spot.
Americans: This proves it! You piece of crap lame terrorist apologists. If you're not with us, you're against us. The US would never do such a thing to hurt Europe, we're the greatest nation on earth, assholes!
Europeans: That's exactly what we're saying. And why are you so upset that we'll make this system, it's not like it's going to cost you any money?
Americans: Europe has shown it's real colors now! You were wrong about Iraq and you are wrong about the US!! We are the greatest nation on earth, don't nobody else try to be relevant!
Europeans: Look..
Americans: SPEAK TO THE HAND CAUSE THE HEAD AIN'T LISTENING!!
Etc. etc.
I've constructed a strawman that's scarily like the majority of Americans posters here. You are truly the most arrogant and loud people I've ever have communicated with. Why don't you stop shouting profanities and try to think it through. Why are Europe so out of rythm with the US? Do you really think we're so jelaous of your way of life?
Re:Cake, eating of and having of (Score:5, Interesting)
You didn't in WWII the Rusians did by tying up the German forces on the Eastern front. By the time you turned up we'd won North Africa and the Battle of Britain, Hitler had given up on the invasion of Britain and had turned to the east hence the Russian involvment.
You did help financially because we were running out of money. Two and half years of fighting drains a country especially when it's being bombed regularly.
When you finally got involved, with typical US arogance and lack of control you cocked up. The Omaha beach landing was a fiasco because you ignored the advice of the Brits who had far more experience and who landed fairly safely. The scene at the start of Saving Private Ryan didn't happen elsewhere.
In the first Gulf war you did it again killing more Brits than the Iraqis and in the second you did it yet again.
From the Daily Mirror, Monday April 7th 2003
Brit Pilot's Punch-up
A Furious British Helicopter Pilot who came under "friendly fire" from American troops landed yards from them, leapt out and exchanged punches
with a US Marine.
The Chinook pilot shouted at him: "When was the last time you saw a f******* Iraqi in a helicopter?"
The pilot and the marine had to be pulled apart as American troops advanced on the north of Baghdad, according to US reports from US Central
Command in Qatar.
British military spokesman Group Captain Al Lockwood said: "I'm afraid it would be an RAF kind of thing to do. "These guys are not known for tolerating fools gladly."
And
The following was broadcast live on CNN on the 24th of March.
In front of camera is the CNN anchor. He is joined by three American military experts (one being a retired two-star general from the 'elite'
Delta Force) and an ex SAS soldier. Footage on side-screen shows Iraqi soldiers surrendering to coalition troops.
CNN Anchor: "We've no current verification as to whether these are US or British troops the Iraqis are surrendering to. "
Yank 1: "They look to be ours - only US troops wear boots like those."
Yank 2: "Indeed, and they appear to have the standard issue camouflage fatigues."
Yank 3 (Delta Force): "I'm not sure - we'll have to get close-up images of them to be 100%. We'll definitely be able to tell from the shape of their Kevlar helmets if they're ours."
Ex SAS: "I'm surprised to learn you're all experts. Since when did US forces carry the SA80 rifle as standard issue? Their DPMs could've been bought, as could their boots and webbing for that matter, so you're chasing rainbows if you can I.D them from their clothes!"
Anchor: "I think you're right."
Ex SAS: "Of course I'm bloody right - anyone with half a brain and basic military training worth their salt should be able to I.D a British soldier by his rifle unless he's special forces! Not to mention the fact that they're covering all their arcs of fire properly, not shouting "woo yeah!" randomly and haven't raised a flag in direct contravention of their orders!"
...At this point one of the Americans pulls his mic off and leaves the floor. The other two look very uncomfortable...
Anchor: "I think we can safely say that the soldiers on your screen are British. Now for these messages..."
Re:It serves us right (Score:2, Interesting)
That Rumsfeld is prepared to do business with the devil to make a buck and that Clinton was interested in the peace process in the Middle East?
Small point: Outside of Chile, most of those regimes were very Communist and very anti-US. The areas where the U.S. played a direct role like Panama, Costa Rica and, before the Communists, El Salvador, tended to have better track records than the Communist regimes that tended to spring up.
I'm sure they thank the US for sponsoring (generally) facist revolutions to remove the communists that led to civil wars in those countries as well. After all, we can't have a communist state suceed can we?
And the next time you want to make a point, avoid reactionary, demagogic, ANSWER-sponsored tripe that sounds trite on the handout, but lacks factual basis or grounding in reality.
Are Americans vacinated against spotting their own hypocrisy at birth or does the constant rewriting of history by Hollywood cloud their ability to reason based on fact rather than patriotic fervour?
Re:Actually... (Score:4, Interesting)
Does it means you are about to get rid of Boeing the company? Their products were used in terrorist attacks on US, after all.
Rebuttal from another portuguese (Score:2, Interesting)
The USA would never have made it has far as to the moon without political reasons (the cold war). Competition was allways good for the space program.
A waste of money? I see it as a way of being less dependent. And should the GPS fail or come under the control of maniacs, its nice to have an alternative.
A waste of money? The ESA is one of the most efficient space agencies in the world. I personally know people working there: everything they do is expected to yeild returns under a tight budjet. Every probe mission features prototype tecnologies from private companies. Even Arianne-space is a private company under contract by the ESA. They are not NASA's white elephant with fortunes to waste in public relations. So stop fooling yourself or drinking pro-bush imperialistic propaganda.
Cooperating? Who's the ones with a multilaterist approach to the world, in a true alliance of nations, unparalleled everywhere? Cooperating doesnt mean "bending over", and friends and allies arent the same as "vassals".
Those Americans may have saved democracy in europe, but that was hardly selfless: they knew they would be the next ones on the line, so better use europe as a war scenario than US eastern shores. Furthermore, if I recall well, they gained their independence with french aid.
P.S. Were on our way to the moon and mars. Check the Aurora program in the ESA site. Regardless of the americans deciding ever to place a foot on mars: we are going to do it. Mark my words.
Re:Peace? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Plans started long before "recent events" (Score:3, Interesting)
As to Israel, they are in the West Bank as an occupying power and are simultaneously trying to 'colonise' it. This is an unpleasant policy which is (in Sharon's case, deliberately) asking for trouble.
Sharon came to power in the wake of Barak's failure and the unrest generated by his walk on the Temple Mount. Since he came to power, the Israeli military has tended to attack something whenever Palestinian militancy looked like dying down. If peace broke out, Israel would not need him so peace has to be avoided.
All this is very off-topic and also is not at all comparable with the way the Nazis behaved, more like how the Germans behaved in what they had previously taken from Poland in the years leading up to WW1.
So why does the EU feel the need to maintain this sort of technology independently of the US? I suppose it is *never* a bad idea to be independent, if you can afford it. There are also sound reasons based on recent history which indicate that total reliance on another country is a dangerous course:
Back in the 80's, West Germany started buying Gas (Methane I think, not Benzine) from the Soviet Union. Reagan was appalled. US Govt sources started claiming that the pipelines were being built using slave-labour from the Gulags, and the US started imposing trade sanctions on certain related essential products needed by the Germans and their suppliers. One of the side-effects of this was to make the Europeans push Airbus Industries that much harder. The pipeline was built anyway.
This US Govt. sees itself as the successor to the Reagan administration so Iraq did not need to be a direct cause of this decision, the mere ideological similarity would enough to set the alarm bells ringing.