RE: Re: [FT] UNSC

From: Corey Burger burgundavia@crosswinds.net

>Another point to consider is that while the UN will have a smaller
fleet, 
it would want to be more powerful, so as to "stare down" possible
threats, 
and nifty new tech is a really really good way to do that

Heck, *I* want nifty new tech too.  That doesn't mean that I get it. 
But I can't see the EvilUN being less bureaucratic, more focussed, or
better at research than the major powers.  IIRC, even that "UN designed
the PTorp" bit is non-canon.
Now, the Present Day Evil UN is beginning to talk about using
mercenaries, instead of contingents provided by various countries, on
the theory that mercs are less likely to botch peacekeeping missions
than the current jumble of national contingents and no one cares if the
mercs get killed anyway.  Please note that the PDE UN is not fielding
Abrams, Apaches, assault carriers, etc.  Once their insidious plot to
control the world moves along and they have a chance to build standing
military forces....then contributor nation A will "forget to pay" until
they get the tank contract, nation B will hold out until they get the
fighter contract, and so forth.

I suppose in 200 years it's theoretically possible that they could
become competent and efficient (and ethical too--if you're going to
dream, dream big).  Probably *after* New York gets nuked.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Mail2Web - Check your email from the web at