Taking Issue With The Outer Space Treaty

tekan writes: "The National Review has an interesting article about the challenges ahead for the settlement of Mars (or the Moon), as well as how Law and sovereignty issues factor into colonizing these bodies." Perhaps most interesting are the reasons cited for entering into the treaty at all -- which had little to do with keeping space a peaceful utopia.

Comments

shut up

[argStyopa]

Oh no, it's FAR more logical to prevent private property ownership by those who can get something done.

Yeah, let's protect space as a free zone, so GHANA doesn't get cheated out of their fair opportunity that they will exercise in what....500 years?

Or wait, let's not commercially exploit space because we're evil capitalists since God knows that the Chinese or Indians or WHOEVER else gets up there (other than us) will be oh-so-altruistic and less self interested than the USA would ever be. I'm sure if they got there first, they would 'reserve a place for America' because, well, they are just nice & good & right & kind & warm & fuzzy, unlike cruel cold-hearted greedy militarist American gov't/megacorps.

This attitude (USA = bad, everyone else = good) is just the flip side of the same "noble savage" bullshit that leftists have been spouting for a century. If the USA is the only one who can make it to the moon, let the USA exploit the moon (every state who has been to the moon please raise your hands...oh, nobody else eh?).