RE: Latest Nations/States/Organizations document

Tim Jones <Tim.Jones@Smallworld.co.uk> wrote:

>What about the United States Of Antartica, Over the years the various
factions
>on Antartica decided not to fight each other but to collaborate to tame
the
>wilderness. The harsh environment has a strong influence on building a
>hardy and resource rich state, with large areas and resources suitable
for
>space
>exploration. They became feared throughout known space by their
distinctive
>blue and white ships and their tenacity in battle. They made it a
policy to
>colonise the fringe ice worlds as they had vast experience and
technology
>in that area. Their first colony on Europa paved the gateway to their
>expansion
>throughout human space.

There's a good idea in here somewhere. I disagree that harsh
envinronments
make for resource rich states. The additional development costs, from
sheltered habitats to imported foods to temperature stress on equipment,
makes for hardy people but poor cash flow. The exception might be when a
VERY valuable resource is present.

However, since Antartica has been the focus of multinational efforts,
there's no reason not to say that other harsh envonronments in space
would
be given similar attention.

I like the idea of harsh planets - perhaps only valuable for scientific
research - with small multi-national science stations. Meanwhile, the
ships
of otherwise hostile nations eye each other warily from orbit. This
could
be the basis for generation of some very interesting scenarios.

Schoon