[BeefWellington]

I would guess that on some level, some analyst many years ago laid out a plan for what should happen with that, and the first thing would be to have a few armed satellites to ensure the continued effectiveness of MAD as a concept.

Yes, it would violate treaties against the weaponization of space but I would lay even money on the idea that some country has already done this.

[bpodgursky]

It's tricky because if you do it in secret, it's not MAD, and it's not actually an effective deterrent.

It only works as a deterrent if you break the treaty and everyone knows you've broken the treaty (whether you publicly admit it or not) but we aren't there afaik.

[toast0]

> It only works as a deterrent if you break the treaty and everyone knows you've broken the treaty (whether you publicly admit it or not) but we aren't there afaik.

It could work if it gets to the point where 'only an idiot' wouldn't have broken the treaty, so you can just assume everyone has, because the idea is fairly obvious, the technology is easy, and there's not any other good options. Or if a rogue state does it or something like it, then you can assume the US and Russia have done it or will be doing it shortly.

[cupofpython]

but then you dont actually have to spend resources breaking the treaty since everyone is already assuming you did.

at best it's just an "are you feeling lucky?" situation unless you publicly prove it

[plasticchris]

Makes the trend to on orbit “servicing” of satellites seem much more sinister.

[nradov]

Armed satellites aren't survivable.