Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Space Privatization: Road to Conflict (Barking Moonbat Barf Alert)
Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space ^ | 6-22-04 | Bruce Gagnon

Posted on 06/22/2004 11:37:31 AM PDT by atomic conspiracy

SPACE PRIVATIZATION: ROAD TO CONFLICT? June 21, 2003

By Bruce Gagnon

The news brings us the story of "space pioneers" launching privately funded craft into the heavens. A special prize is offered to the first private aerospace corporation who can successfully take a pilot and a "space tourist" into orbit.

Is this "privatization" of space a good thing? Is there any reason to be concerned about the trend? Are there any serious questions that should be raised at this historic moment?

Three major issues come immediately to mind concerning space privatization. Space as an environment, space law, and profit in space.

We've all probably heard about the growing problem of space junk where over 100,000 bits of debris are now tracked on the radar screens at NORAD in Colorado as they orbit the earth at 18,000 m.p.h. Several space shuttles have been nicked by bits of debris in the past resulting in cracked windshields. The International Space Station (ISS) recently was moved to a higher orbit because space junk was coming dangerously close. Some space writers have predicted that the ISS will one day be destroyed by debris.

As we see a flurry of launches by private space corporations the chances of accidents, and thus more debris, becomes a serious reality to consider. Very soon we will reach the point of no return, where space pollution will be so great that an orbiting minefield will have been created that hinders all access to space. The time as certainly come for a global discussion about how we treat the sensitive environment called space before it is too late.

When the United Nations concluded the 1979 Moon Treaty the U.S. refused, and still does, to sign it. One key reason is that the treaty outlaws military bases on it but also outlaws any nation, corporation, or individual from making land "claims" on the planetary body. The 1967 U.N. Outer Space Treaty takes similar position in regard to all of the planetary bodies. The U.N., realizing we needed to preempt potential conflict over "ownership" of the planetary bodies, made claim that the heavens were the province of all humankind.

As the privateers move into space, in addition to building space hotels and the like, they also want to claim ownership of the planets because they hope to mine the sky. Gold has been discovered on asteroids, helium-3 on the moon, and magnesium, cobalt and uranium on Mars. It was recently reported that the Haliburton Corporation is now working with NASA to develop new drilling capabilities to mine Mars.

One organization that seeks to rewrite space law is called United Societies in Space (USIS). They state, "USIS provides legal and policy support for those who intend to go to space. USIS encourages private property rights and investment. Space is the Free Market Frontier." Check their web site at http://www.space-law.org

The taxpayers, especially in the U.S. where NASA has been funded with taxpayer dollars since its inception, have paid billions of dollars in space technology research and development (R & D). As the aerospace industry moves toward forcing privatization of space what they are really saying is that the technological base is now at the point where the government can get out of the way and lets private industry begin to make profit and control space. Thus the idea that space is a "free market frontier."

Of course this means that after the taxpayer paid all the R & D, private industry now intends to gorge itself in profits. One Republican Congressman from Southern California, an ally of the aerospace industry, has introduced legislation in Congress to make all space profits "tax free". In this vision the taxpayers won't see any return on our "collective investment."

So let's just imagine for a moment that this private sector vision for space comes true. Profitable mining on the moon and Mars. Who would keep competitors from sneaking in and creating conflict over the new 21st century gold rush? Who will be the space police?

In the Congressional study published in 1989 called Military Space Forces: The Next 50 Years we get some inkling of the answer. The forward of the book was signed by many politicians like former Sen. John Glenn (D-OH) and Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL). The author reported to Congress on the importance of military bases on the moon and suggested that with bases there the U.S. could control the pathway, or the "gravity well", between the Earth and the moon. The author reported to Congress that "Armed forces might lie in wait at that location to hijack rival shipments on return."

Plans are now underway to make space the next "conflict zone" where corporations intend to control resources and maximize profit. The so-called private "space pioneers" are the first step in this new direction. And ultimately the taxpayers will be asked to pay the enormous cost incurred by creating a military space infrastructure that would control the "shipping lanes" on and off the planet Earth.

After Columbus returned to Spain with the news that he had discovered the "new world," Queen Isabella began the 100 year process to create the Spanish Armada to protect the new "interests and investments" around the world. This helped create the global war system.

Privatization does not mean that the taxpayer won't be paying any more. Privatization really means that profits will be privatized. Privatization also means that existing international space legal structures will be destroyed in order to bend the law toward private profit. Serious moral and ethical questions must be raised before another new "frontier" of conflict is created.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: ecowacky; environment; eugenedebs; flatearchsociety; goliath; luddite; socialism; space
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 161-166 next last
To: Dead Corpse
Once privateers have a foothold in space, how the hell are merely Terrestrial governments gonna stop them? How are they going to enforce their edicts? Send up the Space Shuttle to shoot you down? Send cops to your address on Mars? Maybe have one of the Rovers scratch nasty names in the side of your habitat with its RAT?

Space law will come into existence in much the same way as, say, "Arizona law" did: as space is settled, disputes will inevitably arise. Systems of arbitrating disputes and trying cases will be developed as needed. The effectiveness of this system will determine what form concepts like "property rights" will take in this new environment.

61 posted on 06/22/2004 12:46:02 PM PDT by BlazingArizona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: BlazingArizona
The Hunter's Code, the Miner's Code fill in around the edges of the law. I believe that is what you are referring to. Claims registration would require a land office, and a land office would be a gov't function.

Here's what we should do: disband NASA and set up a land office to register space claims under US sovereignty.

62 posted on 06/22/2004 12:51:03 PM PDT by RightWhale (Destroy the dark; restore the light)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: BlazingArizona

How about a Constitutional Republic? This time, we make it legal to shoot a lawyer/lawmakers that try to muck things up.


63 posted on 06/22/2004 12:54:42 PM PDT by Dead Corpse (For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Impressive! Only 7 paragraphs before a Haliburton reference.
Waiting for obligatory Ashcroft or Cheny ref.
64 posted on 06/22/2004 12:58:16 PM PDT by muleskinner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
Now you are making sense.

Here's what we should do: disband NASA and set up a land office to register space claims under US sovereignty.

One caveat. To keep people from selling the "Brooklyn Asteroid", or claiming to be King of the Moon, you have to be able to stake a claim physically on said resource.

Think that'd work?

65 posted on 06/22/2004 12:59:20 PM PDT by Dead Corpse (For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: atomic conspiracy

The left hates anything that smacks of progress.


66 posted on 06/22/2004 1:01:55 PM PDT by Cruising Speed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
Now you are reading better. :)

There is already a huge legal base in case law to handle shysters and scam artists--ursurpers--once property rights are established.

The point of private property rights is establishment of collateral so investors will have reason to invest. Right now, they don't have reason to invest except at the Allen hobby level. Serious money awaits private property rights.

67 posted on 06/22/2004 1:04:15 PM PDT by RightWhale (Destroy the dark; restore the light)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
The Hunter's Code, the Miner's Code fill in around the edges of the law. I believe that is what you are referring to. Claims registration would require a land office, and a land office would be a gov't function.

No, what I'm referring to is the whole concept of a legal code. It arises in any given place to the extent that such place is settled and civilized. Right now, the only "settlers" are the rotating ISS crews who, since they do not occupy land off Earth but operate at the edge of its atmosphere, are legally treated like Antarctic explorers, as temporary inhabitants.

Now fast-forward a century. If I dig an unobtainium mine on Vesta and One-Eyed Jack jumps my claim, I'm going to want to have this dispute tried. To make this possible, I would have had to file my claim somewhere. Settlers in the asteroid belt would have had to evolve a registry of claims and a court for trying disputes. It is with such small steps that a village becomes a civilization.

68 posted on 06/22/2004 1:06:49 PM PDT by BlazingArizona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Phantom Lord
Oh, and Cuban cigars are not all that great. They are far more hype than reality. Dominican cigars are far superior in all aspects.

If I had only smoked the small sub-robusto sized Cubans that most folks buy - because they're cheaper than the good stuff, and they don't smoke cigars anyway but want to impress their friends - I would agree with you. However, I did smoke a Romeo & Julietta Churchill (gold label). Everything said about a good Cuban cigar is true. Nothing comes close.

69 posted on 06/22/2004 1:07:16 PM PDT by muleskinner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: muleskinner; hchutch
Waiting for obligatory Ashcroft or Cheny ref.

Don't forget Wolfowitz, Perle, and other members of the "neoconservative cabal."

70 posted on 06/22/2004 1:08:13 PM PDT by Poohbah ("Mister Gorbachev, TEAR DOWN THIS WALL!" -- President Ronald Reagan, Berlin, 1987)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: muleskinner
However, I did smoke a Romeo & Julietta Churchill (gold label). Everything said about a good Cuban cigar is true. Nothing comes close.

I disagree. I have smoked many a Cuban cigar in my day, and have many in my humidor right now. Including the R&J you mentioned. I also have Cohibas, R&J Cedros Delux #3 (green label), Partagas, La Flor De Cano, Trinidad, and others. But for my money and smoking pleasure, Dominicans are the king of the cigar world at this time.

71 posted on 06/22/2004 1:18:40 PM PDT by Phantom Lord (Distributor of Pain, Your Loss Becomes My Gain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
so what you're saying is that if i spend half a billion dollars on my geostationary satellite and a couple of ragheads decide to knock it out of commission with a 2 foot slug because they have as much right to be there than i'm supposed to suck on it? does that make sense? is that wise?

i guess i'm supposed to raise my own private army to bomb those people because i don't want to rely on the government? i guess you don't rely on the governemnt? you don't use public roads? you don't have a mailbox? you don't have hospitals, police stations, or fire departments all funded by local government? if your house catches on fire you wouldn't call 911? it is, after all, a government program...
72 posted on 06/22/2004 1:19:07 PM PDT by Bordeaux44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Bordeaux44
If you cannot protect your claim, how the heck are you going to stop them?

Do you really want to side track the entire thread on libertarian issues right now? Do a search. There are plenty of threads right here on FR that have already covered all the points you mentioned. I'll be damned if I'm gonna waste my afternoon educating some n00b.

73 posted on 06/22/2004 1:23:53 PM PDT by Dead Corpse (For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: BlazingArizona

Freedom means being really free, if hot dog tries to jump your claim jump back. I have a lot of respect for my Mormon ancestors, who lived in penury for 20 years rather than like the boot of the federals.


74 posted on 06/22/2004 1:28:53 PM PDT by Little Bill (John F'n Kerry is a self promoting scumbag!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: atomic conspiracy

RE: "When the United Nations concluded the 1979 Moon Treaty the U.S. refused, and still does, to sign it. One key reason is that the treaty outlaws military bases on it but also outlaws any nation, corporation, or individual from making land "claims" on the planetary body. The 1967 U.N. Outer Space Treaty takes similar position in regard to all of the planetary bodies. The U.N., realizing we needed to preempt potential conflict over "ownership" of the planetary bodies, made claim that the heavens were the province of all humankind." And herein lies the crux of this entire piece of agitprop. It is incumbant upon the enemies of the USA and Western Civilization to get the US to sign this treaty. For if the US signs it, we'll abide by it, and will be unarmed in space and will have no bases there. Whereas, our enemies will cheat and will secretly create an arsenal in orbit and on the moon, which will be used against us for conquest. If you see an environmental extremist, you are essentially seeing a watermelon, green on the outside and red on the inside.


75 posted on 06/22/2004 1:29:09 PM PDT by GOP_1900AD (Stomping on "PC," destroying the Left, and smoking out faux "conservatives" - Right makes right!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muleskinner

And if forced to choose the best cigar out there right now, I would have to say without question it is the Fuente Fuente Forbidden X. Even better than the Opus X.


76 posted on 06/22/2004 1:40:27 PM PDT by Phantom Lord (Distributor of Pain, Your Loss Becomes My Gain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: BlazingArizona

The concept of the code is the idea that there is a lower level of the law that operates between those in the industry, be it hunting or mining or fishing as developed by those participants themselves. If disputes cannot be resolved through mutual understanding of the code, then recourse can be made to the law.


77 posted on 06/22/2004 1:59:46 PM PDT by RightWhale (Destroy the dark; restore the light)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
I did! Great book.

COYDOG

UNA Frontiers - an online graphic novel


78 posted on 06/22/2004 2:01:33 PM PDT by coydog (End Single-Party rule in Canada!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: GOP_1900AD
unarmed in space and will have no bases

Not only unarmed, but there will be no private investment in space development. The geosynch slots are controlled, so they have value. No one will invest in asteroid mining while they can have no private rights to the asteroid body or minerals. That is, there will be no space development--unless gov't does it and that won't happen. You need something, a piece of paper--a deed, a permit, a license, a lease, anything, and the power of the gov't to back it up.

79 posted on 06/22/2004 2:13:54 PM PDT by RightWhale (Destroy the dark; restore the light)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: coydog
I read his Henry Martyn as well. Haven't gotten around to reading Bretta Martyn yet.

Favorites are still the Win Bear novels. Still working my way around to those books he wrote with Aaron Zelman.

"Sonny, anybody with his gears meshed wants to be free, doesnt matter what sex or age, and freedom always calls for a little hardware."
Lucy Kropotkin

80 posted on 06/22/2004 2:23:57 PM PDT by Dead Corpse (For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 161-166 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson