Space Colony Warfare

[TheMuffinKing]

Is the colony near some astral body (moon, planet, asteroids)? If so, you could hide defenses on these, or lacking them, have stealthy sattellites in addition to what others have proposed.

[Spetulhu]

Who paid for the construction of these colonies? I'd imagine Earth governments and corporations aren't going to blow up their own investments just because there's a rebellion. The only sensible options for taking back your own colony is to lay siege or invade with infantry.

[RedImperator]

Who paid for the construction of these colonies? I'd imagine Earth governments and corporations aren't going to blow up their own investments just because there's a rebellion. The only sensible options for taking back your own colony is to lay siege or invade with infantry.

And why in the world would they spend a fuckload of extra money arming and armoring what are supposed to be settlements, not military bases. Military bases will be in places like hollowed-out asteroids which are a little tougher to take down.

[Nyrath]

There are some more unglamorous and unexciting possibilities.

[1] Perhaps there are no warships, but colonies are constantly trying to hack into each others control computers. Much like the new Battlestar Galactica.

[2] In Samuel R. Delany's TRITON, colonies at war do not use warships. They sent highly trained saboteurs to infiltrate. Colony support systems like life support and nuclear power plants are very vulnerable to sabotage and can cause widespread loss of life or drastic decreases in the population's will-to-fight.

[3] Perhaps warfare is conducted by infiltrating highly trained assassins to sanction with extreme prejudice an enemy colony's leaders, top research scientists, and chief engineers.

[BloodAngel]

And why in the world would they spend a fuckload of extra money arming and armoring what are supposed to be settlements, not military bases. Military bases will be in places like hollowed-out asteroids which are a little tougher to take down.

Weapons smuggling, black market, corrupt cops...there are many ways for a rebellious colony to arm itself, given enough time.

[Guardsman Bass]

And why in the world would they spend a fuckload of extra money arming and armoring what are supposed to be settlements, not military bases. Military bases will be in places like hollowed-out asteroids which are a little tougher to take down.

Weapons smuggling, black market, corrupt cops...there are many ways for a rebellious colony to arm itself, given enough time.

But what good are those armaments going to do them if the Earth Forces just have to either nuke them or blow a hole into the colony with an asteroid? No reactive defense system is perfect, and armoring a colony to the point that it would be utterly resistant to all but major military strikes would probably be very expensive; it'd be cheaper just to settle in an asteroid.

[RedImperator]

And why in the world would they spend a fuckload of extra money arming and armoring what are supposed to be settlements, not military bases. Military bases will be in places like hollowed-out asteroids which are a little tougher to take down.

Weapons smuggling, black market, corrupt cops...there are many ways for a rebellious colony to arm itself, given enough time.

Here's a thought exercise for you: try to imagine, oh, let's say, American Samoa acquiring enough arms through smuggling, the black market, corrupt cops, and whatever other realistic methods you can think of to successfully fend off the US Navy.

Now imagine trying to do the same thing, except everything has to go up a space elevator first. And a single hit will cause all your air to run out a big hole into outer space. And you depend on Earth to resupply you with critical materials, including possibly food and oxygen.

It's not 1775 anymore, and a space habitat is not the Thirteen Colonies. There aren't going to be any plucky rebels defeating the mighty Tyrant Earth with grit, determination, and a little luck. You simply can't revolt when the government can blow you out of the sky any time it wants and there's nothing you can do about it.

[RedImperator]

There are some more unglamorous and unexciting possibilities.

[1] Perhaps there are no warships, but colonies are constantly trying to hack into each others control computers. Much like the new Battlestar Galactica.

[2] In Samuel R. Delany's TRITON, colonies at war do not use warships. They sent highly trained saboteurs to infiltrate. Colony support systems like life support and nuclear power plants are very vulnerable to sabotage and can cause widespread loss of life or drastic decreases in the population's will-to-fight.

[3] Perhaps warfare is conducted by infiltrating highly trained assassins to sanction with extreme prejudice an enemy colony's leaders, top research scientists, and chief engineers.

The three of these together sounds like a pretty damn good story, actually.

[Darth Raptor]

I'm going to challenge the assumption that the orbital colonies are directly dependent on Earth for sustenence.

Going by the OP, it seems as if Earth has reached a point that it is no longer self-sufficient, and depends on the colonies for food production and manufactured goods. Maybe it's progressed to the point of an ecumenopolis, or some military/industrial disaster has made agriculture all but impossible. The tables are drastically turned in this instance; and, depending on the political situation, Earth may very well be on the defensive.

[RedImperator]

I'm going to challenge the assumption that the orbital colonies are directly dependent on Earth for sustenence.

Going by the OP, it seems as if Earth has reached a point that it is no longer self-sufficient, and depends on the colonies for food production and manufactured goods. Maybe it's progressed to the point of an ecumenopolis, or some military/industrial disaster has made agriculture all but impossible. The tables are drastically turned in this instance; and, depending on the political situation, Earth may very well be on the defensive.

I don't get that from the OP at all. However, that's an interesting situation, so let's examine it.

The balance of military power, first off, remains the same. Earth can still blow any colony it likes out the sky. Now, however, it's not possible for Earth to simply force its will on the colonies, because they can turn off the food.

In this situation, brute force military action becomes less desireable because you want to avoid damaging the habitat structure, which brings us to option two: assassins, saboteurs, and crackers. Conflict between Earth and the colonies will be political, and Earth will try to exert control on the internal politics of the colonies through such means: remember, whether or not Earth depends on them, they're still complex, fragile systems upon which any manner of mischeif can be wrought.

There's also the option of playing colonies off against each other. It seems to me unlikely that the colonies would be united unless Earth was so openly belligerant that unification was the only viable option. If they're not united and Earth is, then any attempt to strongarm Earth will most likely fail. If every other agro colony is embargoing Earth, then whichever colony breaks ranks will make a fortune. If enough colonies break ranks, Earth can chose to ignore the rest, or, under some circumstances, blow the recalcitrant ones out of the sky.

There are also assured destruction scenarios. "We, the people of Earth, depend on you, the people of the colonies, for our own survival. However, you, the people of the colonies, are utterly at our mercy, whereas without you, we, the people of Earth, most likely have enough supplies salted away to keep the leadership alive through the famine if we destroy you, until our population falls to the point Earth is self sustaining again. Therefore, you will do as well tell you, because if you don't, it will come to war, and if it comes to war, many of us will die, but all of you will."

And finally, we've been assuming Earth is united through this and the conflict is between Earth and the colonies. But if Earth is still fragmented, then each fragment will likely control its own colonies, or have colonies with which it has made deals for food. If it comes to war, the colonies would represent extremely soft, extremely vital strategic targets. Of course, shooting down one side's colonies make yours a target, so people might hold off--but I can guarantee you if one gets backed into a corner where it's about to lose its space assets, its final act will be to take down enemy colonies, because shortly the other side will be able to destroy his with impunity, and if the other side's colonies are intact while his aren't, the other side will win (whereas this way, both sides lose).

[Darth Raptor]

I don't get that from the OP at all.

Oops, correction: Not the OP, Zor specifically referenced "agricultural colonies", but it was in one of his later posts. My bad.

[Battlehymn Republic]

I'm surprised that no one has brought up the Gundam-style anti-Earth doomsday devices yet.

Suppose that the general public on Earth does not want to see a huge explosion where millions of people once hung out in space. Will siege warfare, eventually leading up to a bloody urban fight within, be inevitable?

[Dave]

The "O'Neill Cylinder" and "Bernal Sphere" colonies have at least one weapon: The mirrors. Either the colonists are beaming power down to Earth (which they could threaten to withold), or they use the mirrors for their own uses (which they could redirect to "cook" portions of Earth.

Mind you, I'm not saying that the orbital colonies would win; I'm just mentioning this possibility.

[Battlehymn Republic]

Yes, as well as Operation:British/Stardust/Meteor, of course.

[Surlethe]

As a last resort, a colony could threaten to crash itself into a major city, couldn't it? Even if it breaks up in reentry, it's still going to cause low-level damage over a widespread area, and if it remains intact, I'd think there could be repurcussions similar to a medium asteroid strike or large nuclear weapon. In fact, the colony could program this as a contingency to the computers governing the guidance systems: if certain people enter the code, or the vital life support systems on the station shut down, then maneuver the station into this particular decaying orbit, which terminates on ... Beijing, or New York, or Moscow.

Weapons smuggling, black market, corrupt cops...there are many ways for a rebellious colony to arm itself, given enough time.

The stations are sitting right on top of the planet, and, since tensions started, are probably being monitored very carefully, both internally and externally, by the various (or single, as the case may be) governments. How do you think they're going to apply this oh-so-strong armor to the station without the entire planet noticing?

[Patrick Degan]

As a last resort, a colony could threaten to crash itself into a major city, couldn't it? Even if it breaks up in reentry, it's still going to cause low-level damage over a widespread area, and if it remains intact, I'd think there could be repurcussions similar to a medium asteroid strike or large nuclear weapon. In fact, the colony could program this as a contingency to the computers governing the guidance systems: if certain people enter the code, or the vital life support systems on the station shut down, then maneuver the station into this particular decaying orbit, which terminates on ... Beijing, or New York, or Moscow.

Anything as large as an O'Neil or Bernal colony would probably not be located in planetary orbit but rather at a Lagrange point, both for permanence of the orbit and to harvest sunlight in the most efficient manner possible. It would take a great deal of energy to break that orbit in the first place, then to steer it on a collision course for Earth.

[Surlethe]

Anything as large as an O'Neil or Bernal colony would probably not be located in planetary orbit but rather at a Lagrange point, both for permanence of the orbit and to harvest sunlight in the most efficient manner possible. It would take a great deal of energy to break that orbit in the first place, then to steer it on a collision course for Earth.

OK. I was assuming that we were talking about colonies in low orbit with Earth, with all the references to space elevators from the OP on. The time it would take to travel from the Lagrange point to Earth in free-fall would also negate its effectiveness by giving time to prepare an effective defense: breaking the station up so it will burn in the atmosphere. Although, as I recall, Lagrange points are where U_earth = U_sun, so it should only take a little bit of energy to move off the orbit; if it's at a Lagrange point, the station should be constantly correcting its orbit from the gravitational perturbations of the other planets.

[Xon]

[1] Perhaps there are no warships, but colonies are constantly trying to hack into each others control computers. Much like the new Battlestar Galactica.

I dont know where to start with just how wrong this suggestion is.

[2] In Samuel R. Delany's TRITON, colonies at war do not use warships. They sent highly trained saboteurs to infiltrate. Colony support systems like life support and nuclear power plants are very vulnerable to sabotage and can cause widespread loss of life or drastic decreases in the population's will-to-fight.

Life support systems would actually be highly robust and redundant, they need to be. Nuclear power plants can be designed so it is physically imposible for them to meltdown. Both areas would obviously be highly guarded. Germ warfare is actually the biggest weapon you would have against an enclosed limited population colony. A simple flu strain could drop everyone from any sort of work detail in a matter of days from exposure.

This of couse assumes there is much active personal moving between colonies/Earth. Playing wack-a-sleeper-agents from Earth is a loss-loss situation, and something any sane Earth bassed government would do for anyone who can drop rocks on thier head.

[Ar-Adunakhor]

The concept of the colonies supplying Earth with food makes little to no sense to me. I mean, what the hell? Anything you have to fling into space to be able to grow that food would be avalible here on Earth, and it would most likely be cheaper due to the fact you don't need to fling it out of a gravity well.

The *only* situation I can see where this is viable would be the slightest bit viable would be the sky being blackened and unable to let light through. (via Matrix means, I suppose) Even then, however, power plants here on earth would be perfectly capable of producing power equal to all but the planet-sized solar collectors or Dyson's Spheres. After all, we could just mine into the earth and use geothermal power. Hell, we could even build more fission/fusion plants below the surface/stacked on one another/whatever. Think Tokyo high-rises with nuclear power plants as opposed to offices or apartments.

Am I missing something? Is there some way, any way, that growing food in space is the ONLY possible method? It just seems to me that everything you have to ship up there comes from earth anyway. Power/sunlight is the only exception, and we can just build power plants and use sunlamps indoors in that case. After all, if you can construct a bigass contained Agri-Sphere, you can construct a bigass contained Agri-Dome for half the price.

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

[snip]
Although, as I recall, Lagrange points are where U_earth = U_sun, so it should only take a little bit of energy to move off the orbit; if it's at a Lagrange point, the station should be constantly correcting its orbit from the gravitational perturbations of the other planets.

I thought that was the case for the three points in line with both the Earth and the Sun, but I thought that the two points 60 degrees off from Earth's orbit (L4 and L5?) were actually in gravitational "pits" (I don't know the correct term) and would be brought back into place through gravitaional effects after all but the largest peturbations?

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

The concept of the colonies supplying Earth with food makes little to no sense to me. I mean, what the hell? Anything you have to fling into space to be able to grow that food would be avalible here on Earth, and it would most likely be cheaper due to the fact you don't need to fling it out of a gravity well.

Well, you could envision a scenario of an Earth which is desperately overpopulated and most of the arable land on the planet has either become desert, or sits unde ice-sheets, owing to climate change. An Earth in this scenario may well need to import some food to make up for what it can't produce on its own. Though an Earth in this sort of future would also be exporting people as fast as it can find places for them, and the conditions on Earth would make it so the population of the planet would be in the process of crashing. And besides you're bringing the food to Earth, which means your main cost is ensuring it survives the trip from the top of Earth's gravity well (I don't know where the hell you're getting this need to fling the food out of a gravity well.)

However, to satisfy the caloric needs (2000 calories) of every person (well, six billion people) on Earth for a day requires efficiently dropping two million metric tons of food on the planet. To feed the richest 1% of that population would take 20,000 metric tons per day. That might make such a scenario more viable, where those bankrolling the colonization are expecting some sort of kickback or tax to dissuade them from sending the Marines (a sort of protection racket, if you will.)

[Surlethe]

I thought that was the case for the three points in line with both the Earth and the Sun, but I thought that the two points 60 degrees off from Earth's orbit (L4 and L5?) were actually in gravitational "pits" (I don't know the correct term) and would be brought back into place through gravitaional effects after all but the largest peturbations?

That may be so. I'm only familiar in passing with the ones in line with the Earth and the Sun, so I don't know about the others. I would think from general principle, though, that you only get pits where you have mass, and so they wouldn't be considered "pits".

[andrewgpaul]

The concept of the colonies supplying Earth with food makes little to no sense to me. I mean, what the hell? Anything you have to fling into space to be able to grow that food would be avalible here on Earth, and it would most likely be cheaper due to the fact you don't need to fling it out of a gravity well.

Well, you could envision a scenario of an Earth which is desperately overpopulated and most of the arable land on the planet has either become desert, or sits unde ice-sheets, owing to climate change. An Earth in this scenario may well need to import some food to make up for what it can't produce on its own. Though an Earth in this sort of future would also be exporting people as fast as it can find places for them, and the conditions on Earth would make it so the population of the planet would be in the process of crashing. And besides you're bringing the food to Earth, which means your main cost is ensuring it survives the trip from the top of Earth's gravity well (I don't know where the hell you're getting this need to fling the food out of a gravity well.)

You don't but first you need to fling a few million tons of dirt and nutrients up the gravity well.

[Stofsk]

You never heard of 'hydroponics'?

This is sci-fi, baby.

[RedImperator]

I thought that was the case for the three points in line with both the Earth and the Sun, but I thought that the two points 60 degrees off from Earth's orbit (L4 and L5?) were actually in gravitational "pits" (I don't know the correct term) and would be brought back into place through gravitaional effects after all but the largest peturbations?

That may be so. I'm only familiar in passing with the ones in line with the Earth and the Sun, so I don't know about the others. I would think from general principle, though, that you only get pits where you have mass, and so they wouldn't be considered "pits".

Any two massive bodies orbiting each other will have Lagrange points. The Earth-Moon system has five, just like the Earth-Sun system. L4 and L5 precede and trail the moon and are very stable--you could fill them with space colonies in easy reach of Earth and the Moon. The solar L4 and L5 points might be useful, too, but then you have a bit of a haul to get there from Earth.

As for acquiring materials for agriculture, once an infrastructure is set up in space, you don't need to haul anything up from Earth. A carbonaceous Earth-crossing asteroid will provide all the materials you need for hydroponics, including the water. Hydroponics will be necessary for the colonies to provide their own food, because proper topsoil is heavy and a bitch to manufacture.