Prev: Re: [FH] About the UN again (sorry Beast) Next: Re: [FH] About the UN again (sorry Beast)

Re: [FH] About the UN again (sorry Beast)

From: Ryan M Gill <rmgill@m...>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 09:59:59 -0400
Subject: Re: [FH] About the UN again (sorry Beast)

At 11:33 AM +1000 7/20/01, Derek Fulton wrote:
>The UN was as probably involved in the 'initial allocation' of 
>extra-solar (and probably in the solar system as well) to help 
>ensure 'fair play' and ended up with some holdings itself. This 
>function probably continues throughout the time line and the 
>existence of the UNSC means the UN can't just be ignored (unlike the 
>present UN).

Well, I don't know about you, but the UN multinational force in Korea 
certainly wasn't ignored. I would envision that typically the UN 
enforces the No Combat in the Core worlds and otherwise stays the 
hell out of other nations business unless called in by more than one 
or two.

>  Like other nation states the UN is also probably adding to it's 
>holdings, either to keep for itself or 'sell off'. After those UNSC 
>survey cruisers aren't just out there to get picked off by a passing 
>alien speices :)

The mandate is nothing outside the Core Worlds. The timeline 
specifically states that. How could they establish power projection 
bases outside the core worlds when they aren't supposed to?

>In the future, (the GZG-verse anyway the) the UN goes cap in hand to
no-one ;)

Then why the limit on power?

- Ryan Montieth Gill		 ----------	      SW1025 H -
-   Internet Technologies  --  Data Center Manager (3N &10S)   -
- -
-		       -
-	      I speak not for CNN, nor they for me	       -
- C&R-FFL -	Toronto, Gun down some squeegee kids,	 - NRA -
-		 Then you can host the Olympics too!	       -	 

Prev: Re: [FH] About the UN again (sorry Beast) Next: Re: [FH] About the UN again (sorry Beast)