Posted on 09/07/2004 7:05:16 PM PDT by KevinDavis
Id like to commend Sam Dinkin for his excellent recent article (See US public land policy and applications for the Moon and Mars, The Space Review, July 26, 2004.) Mr. Dinkin is certainly correct that land ownership could, and should, be used to pursue the goal of getting settlers to the frontier as quickly as possible to help develop and secure it. But, unfortunately, there are several serious flaws in his plan to have the US auction off lunar land for its own financial benefit.
(Excerpt) Read more at thespacereview.com ...
Space Ping! This is the Space Ping List! Let me know if you want on or off this list!
"serious flaws in his plan to have the US auction off lunar land for its own financial benefit."
And since WE have spent the money and lives to get there those would be....???????????
Help them out here... those would be????????
E.S.
The first folks to get to a place and who are able to stand on it and fight successfully, are going to own it.
The League of Nations United Nations (whoever) will have to have spacecraft to say otherwise!
The UN Outer Space Treaty actually has nothing to do with the UN. It's just an ordinary treaty.
That's not how things work. But, there is a way things can work once we get out of that Treaty.
Bump for later.
You may be right, at present. But somebody will figure a way to bust loose from this rock and there will be no way to put Humpty Dumpty back together again!
ps. Whoever does so, please give me a call.
Among other things, the Outer Space Treaty (and several other international agreements) clearly prohibit any claims of national sovereignty on the Moon or Mars, etc.
Only the UN Outer Space Treaty has been signed by the US. That Treaty acknowledges sovereignty of every signatory by their act of signing. Such an act of alienation is defective and impossible and acknowledgement of sovereignty should be reasserted immediately.
it has so many good features, like banning nuclear weapons in space.
This is the only good point and even this one is irrelevant.
If we did withdraw and attempted to auction the land, not another nation on Earth would recognize our lunar land deeds as valid.
Other countries do not have to recognize our lunar deeds, but several would do so immediately.
the US still would have no right to that land until and unless it went up and settled it
This is not the basis of ownership by either public or private agency.
To open the space frontier in our lifetime, we must get private enterprise to invest billions in space development
This is true. Investment would be happening now if private ownership existed in space.
a limited (but still very large) claim to lunar land around the base would be legally recognized by the US government. Recognition means the government would acquiesce to, or decide not to contest, the claim, but not assume any sovereignty over it.
The State would assert sovereignty. Here is no other basis for private ownership of land.
The other way Congress could provide such an incentive is through establishing a system of recognized property rights in space
Yes, do it now, but do it right, that is, the ordinary way. Do not follow the Dinkin-Wasser plans; do not try to circumvent the Treaty. The Treaty is fundamentally defective and void as it stands. Withdraw from the Treaty and set up a land office for registration of private claims following the usual custom of three prerequisites.
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.