Advertisement
by Far-Tortuga » Sun Jun 21, 2009 10:47 pm
by Rutianas » Mon Jun 22, 2009 4:29 am
Far-Tortuga wrote:The most commonly accepted answer to the "many earths" dilemma is that the universe as we perceive it is, in fact, a multiverse. Any given point common to every universe can and most likely has been divvied up between any number of reality perceptions. It is our experience that nations, states, and individuals moving through a point in space-time will or will not meet another nation, state, or individual moving and existing in that same space-time point more or less randomly. For whatever reason, Earth and the Sol System at large is a particularly intense intersection of a multitude of realities.
The exact mechanics of these reality "intersections" are unknown or, at best, guessed at and theorized about. Common governmental procedure seems to be to ignore the philosophical implications and merely exploit the situation to the best of that government's (or corporation's, or individual's) ability.
This dilemma is not of course unique to spacefaring civilizations, although our intersections commonly occur on a much larger scale. We frequently observe the dilemma playing out on the XX Century Earth most commonly found in all timelines, where two nations may find themselves occupying the same geographical space. An accommodation is either reached, or through some sort of metaphysical philosophical group think, both nations "ignore" the existence of the other.
by Remenant America » Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:30 am
by Rutianas » Mon Jun 22, 2009 7:19 am
Remenant America wrote:My nation is in the air and space buisness. We have devoloped space planes such as the B-2C F-26 and F-26A the JJ-247A and a new protype the B-3. They are capable of launching payload from space docking with spacestations and traveling around the sorld faster than any other plane to date.The F-26A for say can carry a team of special ops around the world in four hours into a hostile country do their job and have them back in less than ten hours. Also the F-26 and the B-2C are capable of carrying surrveilance tech and weapons such as nuclear missiles bunker busters and other large and small capable re entry devices cappable of hitting a red dot on a 2x4. This allows the easy deployment of forces and most likely the most capable defence force in nation states. These planes would require either WA authorization to be allowed to fly in space. (which wont happen) or that we spend millions of dollars devoloping new bomb casings to protect the bomb IF it is still attached to the vehicle but if it were to be fired it would burn up in re entry. This also leave the question would the F-26 and B-2C be allowed to fly inro space for quick deployment of forces. Also the JJ-247A has the ability to enter space and dock with a space station should the need arise.The JJ-247A is simply a more superior version of airforce one. It does not carry weapons however does carry the commander and cheif of some nations. Then if the JJ-247A peer say had to dock with a space station IN AN EMERGENCY would we be violationg the proposal by protecting our leader or would it be excused. If we could develop this bomb casing described earlier would the ASRA still be allowed to operate its space planes?
Please see my forum in trade for a thourough description of planes and payload capabilites
by Allied Governments » Mon Jun 22, 2009 8:05 am
Rutianas wrote:
I would say that if you had to dock with a space station in an emergency, because it's not covered here, then it's up to the nation who owns the space station. The Imperial Republic would not deny anyone in an emergency situation access to one of our stations, however, there are some nations who may.
by Flibbleites » Mon Jun 22, 2009 8:08 am
Serbian_Soviet_Union wrote:Flibbleites wrote:Serbian_Soviet_Union wrote:He`s right this has been going on for weeks on end and everybody still hates it and isn`t there some kind of time limit for a draft to become a proposal or something?
No you can draft a proposal for as long as you want, in fact, it's my opinion that the longer a proposal is drafted for, the better it tends to be.
Bob Flibble
WA Representative
If your a future tech nation and want to give uo 10,000km of your space area away cause of some proposal, go right ahead, but no nation is silly enough to give up it's own space area or land. The people have spoken, it's time to put this proposal to an end.
by Gaytania » Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:25 pm
by Rutianas » Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:36 pm
Gaytania wrote:OCC: I have been observing the debate over this proposal for a while now, and while I respect your criticisms and comments. I do believe that some players are using the topic discussed in this proposal as a means to use your role playing to allow you to make stuff up in order to stall this legislation. As far as I know there is now rule against filibustering in the WA, but could everyone just everyone try to use rational arguments here. The least you can do is obey the Laws of Physics in your RPing.
by Serbian_Soviet_Union » Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:47 pm
And when did I give the impression that I supported this idea? I was simply answering your question about a time limit for drafting a proposal.
Bob Flibble
WA Representative
OCC: I have been observing the debate over this proposal for a while now, and while I respect your criticisms and comments. I do believe that some players are using the topic discussed in this proposal as a means to use your role playing to allow you to make stuff up in order to stall this legislation. As far as I know there is now rule against filibustering in the WA, but could everyone just everyone try to use rational arguments here. The least you can do is obey the Laws of Physics in your RPing.
by Otagia » Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:49 pm
Rutianas wrote:Gaytania wrote:OCC: I have been observing the debate over this proposal for a while now, and while I respect your criticisms and comments. I do believe that some players are using the topic discussed in this proposal as a means to use your role playing to allow you to make stuff up in order to stall this legislation. As far as I know there is now rule against filibustering in the WA, but could everyone just everyone try to use rational arguments here. The least you can do is obey the Laws of Physics in your RPing.
OOC: Problem with using the 'Laws of Physics' argument is that everyone can RP their nation the way they want. Now, I'm not sure exactly which argument you're pointing out as being 'made up', but all of them have looked valid to me. If I wanted to RP a bunch of rabbits in space with laser pistols and no planet to call home, I'd be allowed to do so. The discussion has stayed on topic as our own personal nation's situation have been discussed and related to for this resolution. There's no 'filibustering' going on here.
by Serbian_Soviet_Union » Mon Jun 22, 2009 7:12 pm
Otagia wrote:Rutianas wrote:Gaytania wrote:OCC: I have been observing the debate over this proposal for a while now, and while I respect your criticisms and comments. I do believe that some players are using the topic discussed in this proposal as a means to use your role playing to allow you to make stuff up in order to stall this legislation. As far as I know there is now rule against filibustering in the WA, but could everyone just everyone try to use rational arguments here. The least you can do is obey the Laws of Physics in your RPing.
OOC: Problem with using the 'Laws of Physics' argument is that everyone can RP their nation the way they want. Now, I'm not sure exactly which argument you're pointing out as being 'made up', but all of them have looked valid to me. If I wanted to RP a bunch of rabbits in space with laser pistols and no planet to call home, I'd be allowed to do so. The discussion has stayed on topic as our own personal nation's situation have been discussed and related to for this resolution. There's no 'filibustering' going on here.
Indeed, given the lack of a floor for any one person to monopolize, filibusters aren't even possible. After all, it's not like you can't submit the proposal for a vote. It's just that, you know, nobody likes it.
Of course, that's not to say we don't like it. Not being a WA nation, Otagia will quite happily take all that territory that its members no longer use, free of charge. Note that we will be enforcing steep tolls for the use of our spaceways. Thanks, and have a nice day.
by Cobdenia » Mon Jun 22, 2009 8:37 pm
by Serbian_Soviet_Union » Mon Jun 22, 2009 8:44 pm
Cobdenia wrote:I think the only way of doing it would be to spacify Law of the Sea somehow...
International Space = international waters. But even that will end up being bloody complicated
by Gaytania » Wed Jun 24, 2009 5:49 pm
World Assembly,
RECOGNIZING the rapid advancements of technology in the aerospace industry and the increasing exploration of space by WA member nations
NOTING the need for securing the space exploration efforts of WA member nations
DECLARING that extraplanetary military conflicts inhibit the further exploration of the solar system, our galaxy, and the universe
HEREBY:
1)DECLARES that the aerospace that is a distance, measured in each nations appropriate units, to be highly comparable to that of 100,000 AU beyond an member nations sentiently inhabited celestial bodies surface is a trade neutral zone and is not subject to any nation's, regions, or international entity's trade restrictions
(a) RESERVES the right for nations to expand their territorial borders to beyond a distance equivalent to 100,000 AU up to a distance equivalent to 1,000,000 AU as an "Exclusive Economic Zone", within which gives a nation the exclusive right to harvest natural resources, but otherwise this zone will be considered Neutral Space;
(b) This includes all uninhabited celestial bodies within this zone
2)PROCLAIMS that space that is neither territorial nor within the exclusive economic zone be considered 'International Space'
a) National jurisdiction is to be extended to vessels registered in that nation traversing, and on offshore installations located in, international waters and the exclusive economic zone
3)ESTABLISHES the World Assembly Space Council which will function to monitor the safety and security of member nations space programs
(a)Hereby charges the newly established World Assembly Space Council with serving as mediator to review evidence of all border disputes and hostilities to establish an aggressor, where-upon the World Assembly Space Council will mediate an agreement between the member nations clearly defining the borders between them
(b) This agreement will be subject to the final terms defined by the oppressed nations leaders and will need the approval of the World Assembly Space Council
4) EMPHASIZING the right of WA member nations to claim, govern, and defend territory on uninhabited celestial bodies through said nations previously established processes used to annex and claim uninhabited territory on celestial bodies
5) REASSERTS the right of space faring WA member nations to protect their nations trade and merchant vessels from military or criminal attack
6) ALLOWS nations to conduct non-offensive experiments toward the advancement of any legal technology provided, with World Assembly Space Council's oversight, that the experiment will be safe to all neighboring civilizations and have no lasting effects on the local space
7) FURTHER NOTING that the trade and military restrictions contained within this legislation do not apply to a member nations interactions with non-member nations
by Skeelzania » Wed Jun 24, 2009 6:51 pm
by The Emmerian Unions » Wed Jun 24, 2009 8:45 pm
Gaytania wrote:Due to the positive response I received from my last draft. I have decided to edit and re-submit this proposal in light of some of the criticism I have received from my previous. Whether you agree or disagree with my proposal, I hope you all will respect the determination and perserverance that I have shown in my short time here in the World Assembly.
Ifreann wrote:"And in world news, the United States has recently elected Bill Gates as God Emperor For All Time. Foreign commentators believe that Gates' personal fortune may have played a role in his victory, but criticism from the United States of Gates(as it is now known) has been sparse and brief."
by Sionis Prioratus » Wed Jun 24, 2009 10:15 pm
Gaytania wrote:*snip*
by Serbian_Soviet_Union » Wed Jun 24, 2009 10:57 pm
Due to the positive response I received from my last draft. I have decided to edit and re-submit this proposal in light of some of the criticism I have received from my previous. Whether you agree or disagree with my proposal, I hope you all will respect the determination and perserverance that I have shown in my short time here in the World Assembly.
by Serbian_Soviet_Union » Thu Jun 25, 2009 4:17 am
by Serbian_Soviet_Union » Thu Jun 25, 2009 11:50 pm
by Serbian_Soviet_Union » Sun Jun 28, 2009 2:00 am
by Cobdenia » Sun Jun 28, 2009 4:36 am
by Deschenek » Sun Jun 28, 2009 4:46 am
by Charlotte Ryberg » Sun Jun 28, 2009 6:33 am
by Ardchoille » Sun Jun 28, 2009 9:06 pm
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement