May 4, 17 / Gem 12, 01 19:49 UTC
Re: Asgardia will need weapons, no ifs, ands, or buts about it! ¶
"Keep calm and set phasers to stun."
May 5, 17 / Gem 13, 01 15:27 UTC
Hmm I think I have to clarify better , sorry for the misunderstanding. What I wanted to say is peace doesn't come from absence or presence of weapons, but from the aptitude of the individual. Of course weapons market, if it will be present, should be heavily controlled
May 9, 17 / Gem 17, 01 11:02 UTC
Scarbs, your plan is totally dependent on diplomacy always working. With no weapons, you leave Asgardia with no military/militia to defend itself if diplomacy fails. The military should not be looked at as a force for conquest, but as a force for the defense of our lives and home.
May 9, 17 / Gem 17, 01 12:39 UTC
@ Gladlin - you may not have got to point 6 in the overall risk minimisation strategy I presented - protection. This will inevitably involve some form of protective systems / weaponry. Unfortunately, there is a very fine line between equipping yourself for a defence and being viewed as an offensive threat... particularly when you are about 1,000km above the Earth and an "offensive weapon" is anything with mass that you nudge towards the Earth.
Protection by military action simply has to be the last resort. Diplomacy, whilst sometimes slow and painful, is generally predictable. As far as any military action though, I always hear the sage words of Helmuth von Moltke - "No battle plan survives contact with the enemy".
May 12, 17 / Gem 20, 01 05:12 UTC
So many people have totally missed the point and keep mentioning how Asgardia doesn't seek or want to engage in aggressive acts. Well, that is not what I am suggesting, what I am doing is pointing out how simply having peaceful intent alone is not enough to guarantee that other nations or groups will allow Asgardia to enjoy the peace it seeks! Not once in history has there ever been a nation of people who were able to survive without having the ability to defend themselves from aggressors. There are nations on this planet that have the capability to attack a target in orbit and those nations are ran be human beings. Irrational, selfish, skiddish human beings. No matter how peaceful your intent is if someone else is determined to attack you. You only have two options surrender or defend yourself. It is not always up to you when it comes to engaging in war that is a cold hard fact. Many people associated with this project need to quickly accept because you can not build a nation without accepting that which you do not always control and planning for it. Everyone wants peace including me but, I know what I want will not always be what I get. The same holds true for every one living stop fooling yourselves and accept that fact. A nation without a way to defend itself will fall that is guaranteed it is after all only a matter of time!
May 12, 17 / Gem 20, 01 11:49 UTC
Asgardia, as a space nation, will not be immune to attacks but it boils down to cost/benefit. Asgardia isn't land-locked to any other nation, so only nations with rockets capable of reaching it would even be classified as a threat. Of these nations (11 with self-built capability, 7 with rockets purchased from elsewhere), only Iran and North Korea have leaders crazy enough to even consider it. Those two nations would then have to try to hit a target moving at close to five miles per second in a volume of space consisting of over 132 million cubic MILES. The odds of success are fairly minimal. This is one of the reasons why nations don't shoot each other's satellites out of space: the likelihood of missing is pretty damned large and no one wants to look the fool.
In addition, there is very little to gain from destroying an orbiting space platform filled with a bunch of unarmed civilians whose stated purpose is to protect the Earth from space-borne dangers. There is a LOT to lose from such an action, however:
Thus, even truly insane people will find the idea of all of these threats to themselves far outweighing any risks an unarmed Asgardia may pose.
May 12, 17 / Gem 20, 01 21:48 UTC
Who said the leaders of a nation being crazy would be the only motivation for an attack? Also, who said anything about destroying Asgardia? Asgardia will have uncontested access to the resources in space. The billions if not trillions or more of dollars in metals, precious stones, and other resources. Would be irresistibly appealing to the greedy wealthy scum on Earth. Especially, if Asgardia has no way to defend itself from an invasionary force that. Could be sent up piece by piece until they can wrest control of the nation away from it's rightful governing body! Only an idiot would destroy a nation so strategically placed that, it opens up all kinds of doors one would not normally have access to while Earth bound.
Folks need to stop assuming destruction would be the goal of any agressive actions. Especially, when it wouldn't make any sense for any nation to want to destroy a nation that if under their control. Could yield insanely high profits with little investment required! If Asgardia existed now, I had the resources to pull off an invasion, and Asgardia had no way to stop me and access to all those resources. I'd launch the invasion and take that defenseless nation for my self, destroying it would just be a waste. What really makes the idea of a nation not having a way to defend itself laughable is I am not the only person who would think to do what I just said I would do! Hell, the US did just that with IRAQ and you folks really think it is possible for a nation to exist, have access to trillions or more dollars worth of resources uncontested access at that, not have a way to defend itself, and still enjoy peace!!! That belief is absurd, delusional, and just plain wishful thinking, maybe in a few more centuries it will be possible but, it is not now
It maybe hard to hit a moving target in such a large area but, it is not impossible so that excuse is quite irrelevent
May 13, 17 / Gem 21, 01 05:07 UTC
For every topic in this forum we are or should be an example to earth.
So engaging in weapons, money and power would set bad examples.
We are here to give the good examples and to protect earth not our-selfs.
You can think like the ant-nest, it is the result of the ant-nest that is the
most important and the ants them-selfs are part of the project. Sure every
ant can defend himself but that can be done in dialogue and by standing
May 13, 17 / Gem 21, 01 18:16 UTC
In my opinion, I think having leaders that actually know what they are doing is vital to any nation's defense. With so many different cultures, people may have different perceptions about a great many things. Some may even find them offensive. But if the leaders sit down and discuss the differences, figure out the intentions, contact each other and communicate well, we could avoid a lot of fighting and disagreements. To participate as a human on this planet, and understanding the enormous responsibility to be the leader of a country and for the lives of the people who live in it is not something to be taken lightly. Also starting a war merely to gain profit by selling weapons just should not happen.
May 13, 17 / Gem 21, 01 22:56 UTC
In order to protect the Earth, the protectors must also be protected. If the protectors die they can protect nothing, So, I strongly disagree with you regarding the purpose Asgardia may eventually fulfill.
That is true competent leaders are vital to a nation's well being however, diplomacy is only successful as a means of avoiding hostilities when. One of the parties involved can prove that they have a detterent that would make attacking prove to be too risky and a nation full of pacifists would have no such deterrent. I will give you an example the US and the former Soviet Union stalemated each other for the duration of the cold war. Because each country had nuclear weapons ready to be fired at their enemy and neither nation wanted to be annihilated so, neither fired at the other. Now, had one of the two nations say the former Soviet Union for example. Not have had nuclear capabilities what do you suppose the US would have done? Work things out diplomatically or acted upon the chance to rid themselves of a power that rivaled their own? You can bet their action would have been the latter.
That is how human beings think especially those with an agenda, the reason why nations like the US and pretty much any other have armies, navys, and air forces. They understand that the choices of another could lead to them having to participate in hostilities even if they wish not to. What boggles my mind is everyone alive knows this to be true from their childhood experiences alone. How many fights were you and everyone else part of that you did not start? How many times were you and everyone else able to not throw a blow and have the other guy just back off? I do not know why so many people are content to duck their heads in the sand and pretend that this is some ideal world were everyone gets along but it is not. Ignoring the fact that the world is ugly and people at times do ugly things. While pretending that our species is civilized is exactly why human society on Earth is such a mess and why the founder seeks to separate from said mess. If we do the same thing while creating and living in Asgardia we are guaranteed to just recreate that same mess in space and ruin the chance to create something new, something better
May 14, 17 / Gem 22, 01 04:28 UTC
We are not born with weapons but with a brain and a way to communicate.
So in my view it is not necessary to have weapons. Humans made a mess
that is true and we fail like everything before, so we do have to begin with
a new beginning and the first thing to do is eliminating every bad thing that
is possible. I do not say that we eventually will not have something to protect
us but that should only be done when it is really necessary and there is no
other option. The new world is not driven by single leaders or army's but by
industry and science, and as far as i know they have no weapons. Do you
think that spacex has weapons, of-course not, so if you want to use weapons
you will have to call the army, thats their job. It will all be a job of cooperation
where every business and nation has their own jobs, ours is to give good
examples and to protect earth, and like we will be part of the UN there will
automatically be a protection from them. It should not be necessary for us
to be busy with protecting our-selfs but to focus at natural dangers in space.
May 14, 17 / Gem 22, 01 05:51 UTC
The problem with that idea is no one knows when Asgardia will be the target of aggressive actions! Which means any time at all can be the time that defense of the nation becomes necessary. If we wait until a threat has been confirmed it will already be too late. Defense works the best when it is proactive and not passive and no, the world is not driven by industry and science. People are the driving force of the world, for it is people who created science and industry. How do you suppose Asgardia protect Earth if Asgardia can not protect itself? I mean, some threats can not be dealt with by diplomatic methods. You can't just politely ask a gigantic asteroid to change course and not smash into the planet or the nation that is supposed to guard the planet! What you and others are proposing is to situate Asgardia in space, expect that nation to protect the planet, not give that nation the tools it will need to do the job, and still expect it to do the job! Ummm, the environment of space is full of dangers other than we silly humans here on Earth! Many of which a nation in space will need I repeat will need protection from. A gigantic asteroid wouldn't give a damn if Asgardia is part of the UN. It will still smash into the nation and keep on trucking. The same goes for comets and meteors, and meteor showers!
May 14, 17 / Gem 22, 01 07:03 UTC
Well i have already given and read plenty of idea's in other topics for that.
A base on the moon with some kind of wave-lasers would be a start and to
that you can add thrusters do change the path. Explosions are maybe cool but
as we have no resistance of for example an atmosphere they will not have a
great impact i think. Or you would have to drill a hole and place the explosives
there to break it up. Maybe there are other techniques, i do not know.
May 14, 17 / Gem 22, 01 18:46 UTC
All those suggestions have one flaw in common and that is, they all completely ignore the need for a backup plan should they fail. It is unwise to assume that moonbased laser weaponry or changing Asgardia's orbital path with the use of thrusters will be enough to defend the nation once/if it becomes a reality. Considering Asgardia intends to be Earth's protector, the nation's safety is far too important to be gambled with. The fate of the Earth and the people on it would be put at risk if. The primary defenses for Asgardia failed and no secondary defense system existed to pick up the slack