But what treaties have Britain and the US signed, specifically, that prevent them from invading nations which are not recognised by themselves or any other authority?
It's been ruled that Sealand isn't part of Britain, but we don't maintain diplomatic relations with it. Why can't we invade?
Possibly there's a UN resolution preventing this. Not that it would make any difference if we did break it, practically, but I'm interested as to whether it's against any specific international law.
Well, it's only the American Museum of Natural History that's ruled it's not a planet. That's not a general decision. In any case, it's not an asteroid like we get closer in - it's a Kuiper Belt object, and we've never seen one close up. Not to mention the interesting tidally locked relationship with Charon.
I agree with you, based on what Zubrin says in The Case for Mars, but it's not really a stepping stone if you build it afterwards. In fact, the way Zubrin tells it the moon's of negligible usefulness to Martian colonization, and should be considered as a spinoff only.
You're right, they're tidally locked. The same face of Charon always faces Pluto, and vice versa. You could build a bridge between them if you had the materials.
The ISS doesn't do anything useful, at least in its present form. I'd much rather this money was spent on planetary missions (manned or unmanned) than on that orbiting boondoggle.
But it is being printed again, which is why it's in the article. Mind you, I don't mind this redistribution myself, although they should probably take it down now, or at least when the reprint comes out.
On the one hand, there are several I don't recognize, so perhaps they're too US-centric. On the other hand, of the 11 historical events I recognize, only six took place in America and five within the past 20 years, so I don't think your conclusion is really bourne out.
Stallman said he chose it because "gnu" is one of the funniest words in the English language. More specifically, he wanted a recursive acronym stating that his copy of UNIX was not UNIX, as was traditional (eg. things like Eine (Eine Is Nearly Emacs)) and he needed a word to fit it to, and realised he could use GNU if he used an abbreviation.
Slashdot Mirror
There's no reason it can't incorporate a light source as well, which can be turned off when not needed.
It's been ruled that Sealand isn't part of Britain, but we don't maintain diplomatic relations with it. Why can't we invade?
Possibly there's a UN resolution preventing this. Not that it would make any difference if we did break it, practically, but I'm interested as to whether it's against any specific international law.
Well, it's only the American Museum of Natural History that's ruled it's not a planet. That's not a general decision. In any case, it's not an asteroid like we get closer in - it's a Kuiper Belt object, and we've never seen one close up. Not to mention the interesting tidally locked relationship with Charon.
I agree with you, based on what Zubrin says in The Case for Mars, but it's not really a stepping stone if you build it afterwards. In fact, the way Zubrin tells it the moon's of negligible usefulness to Martian colonization, and should be considered as a spinoff only.
You're right, they're tidally locked. The same face of Charon always faces Pluto, and vice versa. You could build a bridge between them if you had the materials. The ISS doesn't do anything useful, at least in its present form. I'd much rather this money was spent on planetary missions (manned or unmanned) than on that orbiting boondoggle.
But it is being printed again, which is why it's in the article. Mind you, I don't mind this redistribution myself, although they should probably take it down now, or at least when the reprint comes out.
On the one hand, there are several I don't recognize, so perhaps they're too US-centric. On the other hand, of the 11 historical events I recognize, only six took place in America and five within the past 20 years, so I don't think your conclusion is really bourne out.
Stallman said he chose it because "gnu" is one of the funniest words in the English language. More specifically, he wanted a recursive acronym stating that his copy of UNIX was not UNIX, as was traditional (eg. things like Eine (Eine Is Nearly Emacs)) and he needed a word to fit it to, and realised he could use GNU if he used an abbreviation.