Skip to main content
added 168 characters in body
Source Link
Dragongeek
  • 21.7k
  • 2
  • 72
  • 123

In a real sense, the OST is more of a 'declaration of intent' rather than an actual law, because for something to be a law, there needs to be an enforcement component, and the UN struggling with enforcing anything is a perennial problem.


In a less charitable sense, the OST is nearly worthless and only hasn't been "broken" because no country has arrived at the point where making a choice that violates it is a good decision from a strategic or tactical perspective irrespective of the OST.

For example, if the USA military command came to the decision that it is of vital strategic importance to put a military base on the Moon and fill it with space marines, they wouldn't just say "aw shucks, the OST says that's illegal, so we can't do that!"

IfWhen they then wentgo ahead and diddo it anyways, what would happen? Maybe the UN would send them a strongly worded emailletter and other nations might grumble about it, but they'd presumably also be in the planning stages for their lunar military outpost because the broader situation applies--the same factors that influenced the US military command to make this choice are likely also present for eg. Chinese military command.


For your torchship, this likely means that so long as the intent of the system does not violate the spirit of the OST (essentially peaceful use of space for all mankind) then you'll likely have no more than the usual level of background oppositionalism.

In a real sense, the OST is more of a 'declaration of intent' rather than an actual law, because for something to be a law, there needs to be an enforcement component, and the UN struggling with enforcing anything is a perennial problem.


In a less charitable sense, the OST is nearly worthless and only hasn't been "broken" because no country has arrived at the point where making a choice that violates it is a good decision from a strategic or tactical perspective irrespective of the OST.

For example, if the USA military command came to the decision that it is of vital strategic importance to put a military base on the Moon and fill it with space marines, they wouldn't just say "aw shucks, the OST says that's illegal, so we can't do that!"

If they then went ahead and did it anyways, what would happen? Maybe the UN would send them a strongly worded email and other nations might grumble about it, but they'd presumably also be in the planning stages for their lunar military outpost.


For your torchship, this likely means that so long as the intent of the system does not violate the spirit of the OST (essentially peaceful use of space for all mankind) then you'll likely have no more than the usual level of background oppositionalism.

In a real sense, the OST is more of a 'declaration of intent' rather than an actual law, because for something to be a law, there needs to be an enforcement component, and the UN struggling with enforcing anything is a perennial problem.


In a less charitable sense, the OST is nearly worthless and only hasn't been "broken" because no country has arrived at the point where making a choice that violates it is a good decision from a strategic or tactical perspective irrespective of the OST.

For example, if the USA military command came to the decision that it is of vital strategic importance to put a military base on the Moon and fill it with space marines, they wouldn't just say "aw shucks, the OST says that's illegal, so we can't do that!"

When they go ahead and do it anyways, what would happen? Maybe the UN would send them a strongly worded letter and other nations might grumble about it, but they'd presumably also be in the planning stages for their lunar military outpost because the broader situation applies--the same factors that influenced the US military command to make this choice are likely also present for eg. Chinese military command.


For your torchship, this likely means that so long as the intent of the system does not violate the spirit of the OST (essentially peaceful use of space for all mankind) then you'll likely have no more than the usual level of background oppositionalism.

Source Link
Dragongeek
  • 21.7k
  • 2
  • 72
  • 123

In a real sense, the OST is more of a 'declaration of intent' rather than an actual law, because for something to be a law, there needs to be an enforcement component, and the UN struggling with enforcing anything is a perennial problem.


In a less charitable sense, the OST is nearly worthless and only hasn't been "broken" because no country has arrived at the point where making a choice that violates it is a good decision from a strategic or tactical perspective irrespective of the OST.

For example, if the USA military command came to the decision that it is of vital strategic importance to put a military base on the Moon and fill it with space marines, they wouldn't just say "aw shucks, the OST says that's illegal, so we can't do that!"

If they then went ahead and did it anyways, what would happen? Maybe the UN would send them a strongly worded email and other nations might grumble about it, but they'd presumably also be in the planning stages for their lunar military outpost.


For your torchship, this likely means that so long as the intent of the system does not violate the spirit of the OST (essentially peaceful use of space for all mankind) then you'll likely have no more than the usual level of background oppositionalism.