NS-UN Update REJECTS the International Space Initiative
Kisnesia
02-10-2003, 19:03
The article, as always, it at our webpage:
http://www.angelfire.com/un/update
Post your thoughts below!!!
---------------
NS-UN Update is an online editorial about events in the NS-UN. Constructive comments are welcome and appreciated.
I agree. I think if interested nations want to create a voluntary UN Commitee on Space Exploration, that is one thing; but, the UN should not mandate when, why, or how a nation's space program runs. What this proposal amounts to is a UN takeover of an individual nation's space program. I would ask those countries voting for this resolution to ask themselves what other aspects of their government they would be willing to hand over to the UN. Should the UN also takeover all welfare programs, education programs, and housing programs. Why don't we all disband our governments and submit to rule by the UN!
Dave Hitler
02-10-2003, 20:35
Leave the UN lads, run your nations how you want, not how thousands of other states vote that you run them. Power to the people......Death to the UN and EU. Build those nukes
Esamopia
02-10-2003, 21:09
Please reject the lastest proposal!
This proposal helps almost no one... for example, whatever space program you have now, including anything that may be used for defense ( :wink: :wink: Space based nuclear weapons...) or just a civilian program, will have to be placed under the evil control of the United Nations, in which every little member, including those who do not have space programs, will be able to run it as they please! You must vote against it!
As for those who do not have a space program, you should still vote against, as the costs of making a new space program are enormous, and you should instead focus on a national space program, making bilateral or poly-lateral agreements with other nations if you feel them necessary.
The proposal has no worth, is of little value, and is only proposed by someone who has dreams of a Star Trek based universe coming out of this... not going to happen!
Space by committee usually Sucks for the aliens!
Space by committee usually Sucks for the aliens!
Space by committee usually Sucks for the aliens!
Kisnesia
02-10-2003, 22:29
Does anybody have anything POSITIVE to say about the resolution??? It seems that the people on these boards TEND to be more pro-sovereignty, while the people that don't get on the boards are more pro-dictatorship.
We of the ARoM refuse to give our best and brightest over to a "New and Improved" version of the UN (in space).
If we are to explore and reach out into the stars it must be for economicly sound reasons or it must be a matter of survival. As is neither of these is true and therefore we of ARoM do not wish to put a single Gold Note into space for our childrens children or our children or anybody elses children.
The basic facts come down to this: Multi-Nation anythings cobled together out of Nations that do not agree on even basic principles of how to run things CANNOT work together for a larger project without undo friction and therefore undo waste of time, money, and man-power.
We urge to anybody who hears our call to not only vote NO on this but to also spread the word of the evils of the UN and all its Socialist ideals.
This has been an address from the High Lord Mongor XXIII
if you egotistical game mods ever delete this proposal i bet you all are mad dictators. i read that proposal and it sounds legal binding. that is all i can say.
raz
Qaaolchoura
03-10-2003, 01:54
I voted FOR it is vague enough that I can maintain my space program ater it passes, and seeing how well this one does we might not be so lucky next time.
We also see no problem with the new proposal. Yshurak votes FOR.
The Nation of Utopian Visions votes FOR this resolution, as we are staunchly against nationalism and seek to unite the world's nations under one banner and one Federal World Government. This measure would extend international control into space and thus continue to degrade national sovreignty while at the same time lessoning the chances that offensive weapons' platforms will be in outer space.
Eh.
I'm voting against.
Competition is what makes it a space 'race'. If we all work under one committee it'll be more of a space 'crawl'. Healthy competition is what gets things done, not working together. Besides, what's the POINT? It's interesting, but Earth can still support many, many more humans if we're smart about how we do things.
The Protectorate of Grotia enthusiatically supports the UN Space Motion. As a small nation, Grotia cannot currently field its own space program, yet feels it has much to offer the world in such areas as nuclear fuel and insurance of the program itself. (With a small profit to us, of course...) Those states that continue the separate state programs not only splinter the world's unity, they also pose a threat to humanity itself; if an extraterrestrial entity does come to earth, a unified front must be shown, not a hodge-podge of states. Therefore, Grotia supports the UN and its space program, and urges all peace loving nations to support this great institution.
Ich Dien!!!
Starry Night
Minister of Astronautics and Mentally Disturbed Painters,
The Protectorate of Grotia
Eh.
I'm voting against.
Competition is what makes it a space 'race'. If we all work under one committee it'll be more of a space 'crawl'. Healthy competition is what gets things done, not working together. Besides, what's the POINT? It's interesting, but Earth can still support many, many more humans if we're smart about how we do things.
What was the point of going overseas a couple of centuries back? Back then, I assure you that Europe had enough space and resources to support all. There's economic gain in space, also scientific gain. Consider it an investment.
As for the space race argument... not everyone is in the UN. Thus, two alliances would be formed, those in and out of the UN. It is shown that a space race is more efficient if only two parties are racing, and the rest boils down to cooperation. What is a better way to divide the world in two parties than to let them choose for a proposal such as this?
Respectfully,
Michael Malthus
Ministry of Communications
As for the space race argument... not everyone is in the UN. Thus, two alliances would be formed, those in and out of the UN. It is shown that a space race is more efficient if only two parties are racing, and the rest boils down to cooperation. What is a better way to divide the world in two parties than to let them choose for a proposal such as this?
So, what you're saying is that if I oppose having the UN take over my space program, I should renounce my UN membership? Doesn't that sort of defeat the purpose of the UN?
I see the UN as a place to vote and be heard, as a common meeting ground for all nations of opposing viewpoints. If you take away that neutral meeting ground, you defeat the purpose of negotiation.
I support the UN, but I do not support the UN dictating policy to me. If the UN were to propose an International Space Agency with voluntary participation I'd vote for it whole-heartedly. It's this heavy-handed stuff that negates my national authority that gets me.
**************************
http://www.pwfc.org/images/gallery/smtorso3.jpg
Emperor Devon I
Empire of Treznor
**************************
Kisnesia
03-10-2003, 14:38
As a small nation, Grotia cannot currently field its own space program, yet feels it has much to offer the world in such areas as nuclear fuel and insurance of the program itself. (With a small profit to us, of course...)
Then we would suggest forming an alliance with other small nations, and footing the bill together (like the European Union does), instead of forcing my nation to pay for your space exploration.
Qaaolchoura
03-10-2003, 21:15
Once again, I reiterate, there is a loophole the size of a politician's head in that proposal, which will allow us to maintain our own space programs.
Better than one which forces us to give up our space programs, and judging by the support for this one, one like that would pass.
Whine the most. ISI was passed, so why don't you just shut UP?
We left the UN over this. If resolutions like this one are what the UN are about, we don't need the UN.
I fail to see how ISI strongly furthers the cause of democracy; I'd say it strongly lessens the sovereignity of nations.