Kit-Fox wrote:Iƒrit wrote:do you even know the definition of the term 'space' entitled in that treaty?? those weapons do very much exist, does operation agent orange, ring any bells? that is a 'space' based weapon.I mean ffs the UN pass resolutions & treaties all the time about stuff that is never gonna happen or isnt a threat etc etc. I suppose when the UN made the treaty banning space weapons ( 1967, at which time such weapons didnt exist ) it was a great big conspiracy to hide the then non existant weapons from the public?
Without re-reading the treaty, the fact it is titled as the Outer Space Treaty, implies anything with an altitude of 62miles above the ground or greater.
Which I think you you will find would preclude agent orange from been used as it would freeze at those altitudes
I didn't see anything that indicated a particular height, and though the title seems rather easy to make an assumption at glance, I still went to look up what you were referring to. I read it as earths lowest portion of the atmosphere and beyond, though after going to check again I did notice I read improperly as it was "above earth's lowest portion of the atmosphere and beyond." And aircraft's can reach heights into our lowest portion. But not above it, though we are close
So I was incorrect at that point, but in regards to space bound weapons and reading the treaty, as well as understanding the capacities of radio-waves and microwaves, I still can't agree with you that they did not exist, also the treaty indicated worry of using nukes in the area defined. And was not discriminative to location of the weapon, more to the area effected by the weapon, based on its location.