The concept of spy satellites is a paradox.Justify?

Answer 1

The concept of a spy satellite is not a paradox.

Sure you can see the spy satellite and at certain times each day specific military bases close hanger doors or cover objects because a known spy satellite is overhead. But, you can never tell what the spy satellite is looking at since it can look at anything to the horizon. There is a limit to what the satellites see determined by their orbit, and you can determine their orbit with radar.

Spy satellites are still very useful. Not only do we have resolution able to read a license plate, but with infra red and alternate radiation spectrum analysis we can see things that are normally hidden or even buried. This technique has been used by NASA to find lost Mayan temples that were overgrown by the jungle. The satellite maps imaged the temple locations so exactly that the ground party didn't see the temple until it was within hands reach. If it weren't for the satellite they would never have found those temples.

Spy satellites also have another function. North Korea knows that we can see whatever they are doing no matter how tight their security is. They can't build a shack without the US knowing about it. They have a nuclear program that has many starts and stops and it has been a problem with the US and the UN. The North Korean's know that they can't hide their nuclear facilities from the US, it is pointless so they don't even try. This is some pretty powerful insurance.

A terrorist attack is supposed to be a surprise. A nuclear missile attack cannot be made in surprise due to spy satellites. If any nation launches the other nations and their allies will have time to react before their weapons are destroyed. They will also have time to evacuate target areas, for key personal (like the President). This helped to insure that a nuclear war never happened. Spy satellites were one of the corner stones of the MAD doctrine; MAD means mutual assured destruction. In any war scenario with the Soviet Union the US would have time to destroy the USSR before they could destroy us so it was pointless to try a nuclear missile attack.

Not everyone knows that a spy satellite is overhead and what it is capable of seeing, where it can look or what it is looking at. So they don't know when they have to hide and always have to spend the extra time to maintain secrecy, which is time that can't be spent on other things.

Spy satellites have a tremendous value and are not a paradox. But, I get your idea; if you can see the satellite then how can it be a spy? Russia can see our radar antenna, but they cannot evade them.

Answer 2

2

Answer 3

No more so than using binoculars to see what ships are in the approaching fleet, or listening in to the enemy's radio transmissions.

The word "spy" may be misleading because it seems to imply secrecy. But it doesn't matter if they know the satellite is up there. If the other side has something they can't hide (troop movements, airfields, construction), we can see it. Just because they know we see it doesn't take away the value of the knowledge.

All that said, there is still going to be an effect of being watched. So countries try to build underground and disguise their facilities. But they can only do that so much.

Answer 4

The nature of espionnage is that it is covert. The person spied upon should, ideally, never know that the espionnage has occurred.

"Spy" satellites are well-known. Their success lies in the fact that, even though everyone knows they're there, no one can do anything about them. Any country that DOES have the technology to knock a satellite out of orbit has too much invested in their OWN satellites to risk the retaliation that would occur.