Prev: Re: RE: Sa'Vasku for the Fleet Book Next: RE: RE: Sa'Vasku for the Fleet Book

RE: OT You want underreported news...

From: "Moody, Danny M." <DMoody@b...>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 12:39:52 -0500
Subject: RE: OT You want underreported news...

> From: Los [mailto:los@cris.com]
> 
> I'd hardly call it underreported since the whole sordid 
> affair has been over the
> news for two weeks.
> Los

It isn't really much of a treaty.

> UsClintons@aol.com wrote:
> 
> > You want underreported news of the year...
> >
> > How about the US Senate voting down the 'Nuke test ban' 
> treaty THE DAY AFTER
> > the worlds most unstable nuclear power undergoes a military 
> coup!  

I have two big problems with the treaty:

1.  It stops any use of nuclear explosions in space, for any reason.

Article III, Section 1, Para c:
"(c) To prohibit, in conformity with international law, natural persons
possessing its nationality from undertaking any such activity anywhere."

Thus, it completely bans any work on Orion type ships, and any work on
some
possible fusion rickets that are nothing but a directed, continuous
fusion
explosion, since it bans "all other nuclear explosions."

2.  It really doesn't ban anything, since there is an opt-out clause:
Article IX:

"ARTICLE IX 
DURATION AND WITHDRAWAL 
1. This Treaty shall be of unlimited duration. 

2. Each State Party shall, in exercising its national sovereignty, have
the
right to withdraw from this Treaty if it decides that extraordinary
events
related to the subject matter of this Treaty have jeopardized its
supreme
interests. 

3. Withdrawal shall be effected by giving notice six months in advance
to
all other States Parties, the Executive Council, the Depositary and the
United Nations Security Council. Notice of withdrawal shall include a
statement of the extraordinary event or events which a State Party
regards
as jeopardizing its supreme interests. "

IOW - anyone can opt out with six months notice, for any reason *they*
determine jeopardizes their supreme interests.

> > A country
> > that has already voiced support for the treaty IF the US 
> had ratified it...

Except that the government that voiced support no longer exists.

> > My God!  Talk about politicians playing with our lives!

Don't they always?

> > God I hate politicians!

Agreed!

ObFT:  Are their any agreements amongst the FT star nations about naval
force size?  Force Useage (no nukes, bioweaps, etc)?  Maybe agreements
similar to the Washington Naval Treaty are/have been in effect.

 -- vargr1						UPP-8D9B85 --
The three principle virtues of a good programmer   |
dmoody@bridge-dot-com
 are Laziness, Impatience, and Hubris.		   | vargr1@jcn1-dot-com
	     ** Omnia dicta fortiora, si dicta latina. **	    


Prev: Re: RE: Sa'Vasku for the Fleet Book Next: RE: RE: Sa'Vasku for the Fleet Book