Posted on 07/17/2004 4:15:05 PM PDT by RightWhale
> They all ignore the issue of private property rights.
That's no problem in the case of the moon.
When the Chinese land there, they'll claim
the whole thing anyway.
Taiwan is just practice.
Ping.
Spudis said that there are people within NASA who are failing to see what the President has asked to be put in motion. "This is as clear a policy direction as we’ve ever had. And yet people at NASA persist in misunderstanding it."
Gee, doesn't that sound familiar?
Space Ping! This is the Space Ping List! Let me know if you want on or off this list by freep mail!
Time to de-RAT NASA.
The persistent misunderstanding is what tipped me off.
I think the treaties we (U.S.) have signed makes the moon "international" territory, much like the arctic and antarctic..
I'm assuming that is what you are referring to..
However, there are no treaties, international or otherwise, obligating the U.S. to provide transportation to the moon,.
Likewise, to provide support for any other nation's colony or outpost that they may build there...
The point here is that space will not be developed without property rights. That is in the President's Commission report and that is being ignored, and not only by NASA--they cannot do anything about it, it is a legal problem--but by the President, the White House, Congress, the USSC, and by all private entrepreneurs including the ones represented in this article. None of the get it.
Maybe Bush ought to "de-fundify" Tumlinson's leftwing-kissass attitude.
When the first private ship lands on the moon, the owner should declare HIS personal property. That oughtta get their panties in a bunch.
Bush should do battle where the voters are. Lunar block grants aren't going to increase the number of Bush voters on the moon, even if it is made the 51st state between now and November.
Sure, but he will lack the resources to make anything of it. There will be no significant investment. He will have to give up even if he gets that far.
The Chinese can build an installation on the moon.. just as much right as us..
I would assume there may need to be some negotiation of "territorial" limits or some such diplomatic garbage, but that is all well and good.
I would think that it would be understood the Chinese or Russians, etc.. would not be expecting to "tour" our facilities any time they felt like it, unless such arrangements were totally reciprocal..
I believe there are some agreements concerning arms in space, that may or may not still be in effect that would guarantee access for verification of those treaties..
But if you're talking about our building a facility and the Chinese or Russians, etc., having some sort of "right" to move in and take up residence, I don't think that would apply..
Just as any spacecraft would be considered "sovereign" vessels of the U.S., so would our installations or facilities..
Bush would not consider whether the action would gain him votes or not--he does what is right in his own estimation and hopes the citizens see it the same way.
As the treaty stands anything you launch is yours. You could launch modules and build a lunar base no problem. However, if you use lunar resources there would be a problem.
well, I assume the first private vessel would just land and take-off after a quick visit. But I could imagine the reaction of him/her putting up a sign "Property of ---- ------"
I agree that in the end, Bush will do what he wants and the rest of us be darned.
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.