.:.:.:.:
RTTP
.
Mobile
:.:.:.:.
[
<--back
] [
Home
][
Pics
][
News
][
Ads
][
Events
][
Forum
][
Band
][
Search
]
full forum
|
bottom
Reply
[
login
]
SPAM Filter:
re-type this
(values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)
you are quoting a heck of a lot there.
[QUOTE]blah blah blah[/QUOTE] to reply to arktouros.
Please remove excess text as not to re-post tons
message
[QUOTE="arktouros:1035696"][quote]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty The Outer Space Treaty represents the basic legal framework of international space law. Among its principles, it bars States Parties to the Treaty from placing nuclear weapons or any other weapons of mass destruction in orbit of Earth, installing them on the Moon or any other celestial body, or to otherwise station them in outer space. It exclusively limits the use of the Moon and other celestial bodies to peaceful purposes and expressly prohibits their use for testing weapons of any kind, conducting military maneuvers, or establishing military bases, installations, and fortifications (Art.IV). However, the Treaty does not prohibit the placement of conventional weapons in orbit. The treaty explicitly forbids any government from claiming a celestial resource such as the Moon or a planet, since they are the Common heritage of mankind.[1] Art. II of the Treaty states that "outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means". [/quote] Not sure if this is the best idea on the government's part but I can see the benefits - research & development of viable deep-space propulsion, human survivability, practical applications, etc is way cheaper than actual hardware. Time and money is better spent working on viable future research than more moon hardware that doesn't do much. Also, American companies encouraged to research and sell tech to NASA = win.[/QUOTE]
top
[
Vers. 0.12
][ 0.013 secs/8 queries][
refresh
][