Vulnerability of Space Settlements to Attacks

Thanks, Mitchell, for your thoughts. I have some comments in return.
Mitchell James wrote (10/06):
Monart Pon wrote (10/05): > A further question: Assuming that a country in space, inside a highly
> technologically sophisticated pressure vessel, is susceptible enough to
> terrorist or military attack, would or should this apparent vulnerability be > an influence on the amount of political, civil liberties of the citizens? > Would the very fact of the vacuum of outer space, and the necessary hi-tech > systems to maintain life there, be the basic justification for establishing a > highly regimented, strictly regulated, paramilitary type of society -- for the > sake of environmental security? How vulnerable a space settlement will be is dependent on it's design. It is also dependent on how you view the acceptable risk. In round numbers: 10,000 dead out of a population of 10 million = .1%. Is this acceptable risk? Any space settlement design will have many safety systems and processes built in due to a large number of possible disasters. On the other hand there is ample evidence of large foreign bodies striking the earth and wiping out a large percentage of the biota. There doesn't seem to be paramilitary organizations around based on combating these foreign invaders. There will of course be people like firemen, police, and emergency crews whos job will be to handle these situations just like there is today. I don't see this having much of an affect on space settlement culture in the same way that it will have minimal long term impact on the US except for giving President Bush something to focus his presidency on. You're right that, just because of hazards and dangers from attacks, a space settlement doesn't have to be organized along paramilitary lines for security. But I've encountered many arguments for regimented, strictly monitored and controlled space societies, using the hostile space environment and the vulnerability of a space habitat as justification. Observe now on Earth the calls for and enactment of measures by the government that can curtail many liberties Then there is something to consider on a really nasty note. "The who cares factor". There will be many more people dying of starvation in Afganistan this winter than died in the world trade center. Does anybody in the current Afganistan government or the feuding warlords in the north really care? Particularly since most of those dying will be women and children? Would we have cared before or now? I certainly hope that future space settlements are not consider as filled with throw-away people. But consider the actions of American Airlines in laying off a large percentage of the area in which I live (Dallas/Fort Worth) all for the sake of the bottom line. Are the econmic titans of the future going to be concerned with a space settlement that is losing money? This is one of the reasons that I think that we over emphasize economics when justifing space settlements. What happens when the market goes bust as it surely will? I am more concerned with a bust in the economic cycle than a terrorist attack. I understand your discouragement from seeing a lot of people's apathy and hypocrisy in regards to the injustices against, and suffering of, innocent people. But I also detect that ~you~ care, a little bitterly, but you care. You are disgusted and angry at the irrationality and malevolence that exists, and wish you could do something, but feel powerless about it. You wish more people could see what you see: a wondrous world of the future in space, possible now, if more people could see that the root of benevolence and goodwill is respect for reason and reality, for honest achievement of those values that bring progress and prosperity. I want you to know that I am one of many who do.