Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Is Earth Soverign?  
User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 1280 times:

This would be a theoretical or hypothetical political question.

Had we realized that in the future that we were part of a universal atmosphere of different planets and systems having similar political problems as we have been having here on Earth, would us not knowing about them prevent one of them from justifing a forced habitation and ruling an area on Earth that would otherwise be soverign with respect to us?

In otherwords, if their law states that a planet is soverign when it is "ruled by one", i.e. monoarchy, then the UN wouldn't even qualify as there are other nations not in the UN. So are we screwed, is Earth just a region of warlords, per se (don't get testy on my choice of words), compared to the universal community?

Like say there was a conflict between 3 systems and all of them noticed us all of a sudden within their expanding borders, could we on Earth represent ourselves without getting 'taken' as one of them? Is it their responsibility to consider diplomacy an option or would we see a war unlike we've ever seen?

We do not have yet to worry about a political interplanetary invasion or negotiation of our planet, but I think this is worth dicussing.


The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
20 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineGo4EVA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1256 times:

Is this your topic ?




User currently offlineLHMark From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 7255 posts, RR: 46
Reply 2, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1236 times:

Ummm....right.


If this intergalactic society were revealed to us, it would probably change an awful lot of things here on Earth.



"Sympathy is something that shouldn't be bestowed on the Yankees. Apparently it angers them." - Bob Feller
User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 3, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1225 times:

Well....yeah, but are we soverign? Now, for example?

And, let me qualify, this is a serious inquiry to me. If it is not to you (Go4EVA) why respond at all?  Insane



The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
User currently offlineArmitageShanks From UK - England, joined Dec 2003, 3625 posts, RR: 15
Reply 4, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1226 times:

The only way we would have to be considered soverign is if some other group was there to challenge us and we had the ability to control our actions as one. Is that right?

User currently offlineGo4EVA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 1215 times:

And, let me qualify, this is a serious inquiry to me. If it is not to you (Go4EVA) why respond at all?

I apologize. My bad...  Sad

Sometimes people put out threads similar to this but are attempting comedy. I guess that's what I did: "attempt".

Sorry.

- Jeff

My take on an answer, if I understand your premise correctly, would be that occupation seems like an implementation of a law whose consequence is loss of some sovereignty.


User currently onlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21462 posts, RR: 53
Reply 6, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 1211 times:

The idea of "sovereignty" is a consensus-based convention. It doesn´t exist by itself.

So it would depend on the "universally" established consensus in that case... We could only hope to be lucky...  Wink/being sarcastic


User currently offlineRockyRacoon From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 974 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 1197 times:

The aliens will have to send Gort to control us  Smile Gotta love The Day the Earth Stood Still

User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13602 posts, RR: 61
Reply 8, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1176 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

No, but it IS sovereign.  Big grin


"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineAir2gxs From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 1136 times:

You can declare your-self sovereign all you want, unless you are recognized as sovereign by outsiders, it doesn't mean a thing.

To answer your question; I don't think that we would be considered sovereign at this point because we do not speak with one voice.


User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 10, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1114 times:

Go4EVA, you are forgiven with open arms.  Smile

If so, and Earth is not sovereign, does that mean any outside force has a right to invade? Maybe that is asked wrong, more like: Other than their morals, what is stopping them from acting however they want in their best interests?



The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
User currently onlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21462 posts, RR: 53
Reply 11, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1105 times:

Nothing.

(Unless we´re hoping for bureaucracy, their own ineptitude or insufficient funding...  Wink/being sarcastic)


User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 12, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1098 times:

We assume there is no threat of invasion of any type just because we have not found intelligent beings such as us (at least news made publically known), shouldn't we prepare? I've heard all the fantasy senarios of alien invasions and whatnot that we'd see them from afar first, they wouldn't just materialize from nowhere, or would they? We also assme our science is the lastest and most advanced there is**. Would we have enough times if they found us?

We certainly can't tell them to go away, or given them the finger (like they'd understand), or tell them to "put 'em up bitch".

I agree, it does seems like a national security non-issue...now  Smile



**BTW, one of the things that have always gotten my goat is when our scientists claim aliens on Earth couldn't have been here just because our science proves they can't get here (by orders of magitude). Is this a joke? They do not live on our science, they have their own. How can we expect their technology to be limited by our known science? Is that not kind of ignorant/arrogant? The world does not revolve around us, metaphorically.



The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
User currently offlineBanco From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 14752 posts, RR: 53
Reply 13, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1097 times:

The usual argument against fear of invasion is that any species capable of interstellar travel would have had to pass through a nuclear age first. Thus, any inherently warlike species would have wiped themselves out beforehand.

Secondly, the lack of discernible radio transmissions suggests that there aren't any advanced planets that near to us.

It could all be proved wrong in a twinkling, of course.



She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
User currently offlineLV-ARG From Argentina, joined Sep 2001, 50 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1084 times:

All will be part of the irken empire
I AM ZIM!


User currently onlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21462 posts, RR: 53
Reply 15, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1085 times:

The question of invasion - or even of peaceful visits - is not nearly as simple as science fiction makes it out to be for obvious dramatic reasons.

The first thing that would happen would be an all-out war between the respective micro-fauna and -flora of the invaders/visitors and our own.
The major problems Australia and New Zealand are having with foreign species are a picnic against what both sides would have to face in case of direct contact.

So even if the problem of interstellar travel would have been solved, an invasion would almost certainly bring a lot more risks than potential benefits.

They could see us as a threat and simply try to destroy us, but that´s a different matter.

Anyway, we´re very probably far away from any capability to defend against an advanced attacker. Very little we could do. So let´s hope it will remain theoretical.  Wink/being sarcastic


User currently offlineL.1011 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 2209 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1081 times:

You have to remember that as intelligent life (be it people or otherwise) adapts to its specific environment, its science and invention develops differently. Undoubtably, we will have things the aliens would want, and they would have things that we want. These "war of the worlds" scenerios are fun for movies but the reality would probably be a peaceful and productive exchange of goods and ideas, because if they kill us, how will they know how to use our stuff. For someone that has never seen a cockpit before, its operation is not immedietely self-evident. Any relations would likely be peaceful. And, to address the question, I feel that Earth is not soverign, the United Nations is also a lousy representative. It seems that NATO would be an OK idea, but any delegation would have to be led by the United States, as we are the only nation that has the facilities to handle an alien landing. Also, don't forget, America is a nation consisting of every people and culture on the planet. We have embassies or consulates from almost every nation, so any reasonable person sees that we would be a great inital representative.

User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 17, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1047 times:

"These "war of the worlds" scenerios are fun for movies but the reality would probably be a peaceful and productive exchange of goods and ideas, because if they kill us, how will they know how to use our stuff"

Banco mentioned that "...usual argument against fear of invasion is that any species capable of interstellar travel would have had to pass through a nuclear age first..." and considering what you mentioned "...as intelligent life (be it people or otherwise) adapts to its specific environment, its science and invention develops differently...".

What are the chances that they, apart from developing differently, have discovered shortcuts to invention and thus would not have a need for our technology? Obviously if they have spaceships they may have airships of some kind, they will be facinated but not truly interested in what products we have to offer. They will, on the other hand, have a great need for our resources and since some areas of our planet have abundunt resources they may have the idea of uncrowding Earth for economical or even territorial concerns. It I ran into a lesser species (like mideast terror - no offence) that had something I wanted (WMD's), if I did not know anything about them before; I would want to perform a recon, establish a base and grab a few locals to see what they are like and ask questions (innocent of course, for diplomatic reasons); all in their region before it would be safe to take them out.

IMO, they will kill us provided they out numbered us technologically as opposed to individually. That is one reason why those poachers (black-eyed gray aliens) I read about are not about to take over the world, we outnumber them or they do not send enough of them here often enough. As if they are on a f*ckin expedition...  Insane



The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
User currently onlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21462 posts, RR: 53
Reply 18, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 1035 times:

Why risk being exposed to our hazardous biosphere when there are thousands of lifeless planets with similar resources? I just don´t buy the theory that aliens would go to all the trouble for just a few natural resources most of which would probably be easier accessible in space anyway (easier transportation).

User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 19, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 1014 times:

"Why risk being exposed to our hazardous biosphere when there are thousands of lifeless planets with similar resources?"

Really, I wanna know how you know that, what were your sources?

Besides, like I said, they could be just interested in us as a resource. 60 years ago, we basically told the nearby universe we are here -- with Trinity, the first atomic bomb. Granted it's energy magnitude must have been tiny when compared to, psh, everything in the universe; fission is not natural. Everything in space is fusion. The light from a fission reaction would show up differently to a detector. We assume our technology when figuring the sensitivity of this alien detector, let's say it was sensitve enough. None of the other planet are giving off this oh-so-faint unusual signal. Would it not be worth exploring, like if our Mars rovers dug around Mars and found a partial skeleton...



The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
User currently onlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21462 posts, RR: 53
Reply 20, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1012 times:

a) Even the biggest hydrogen bomb (based on fission/fusion, by the way) would hardly register on even the best detectors from a larger distance against the background of our giant resident nuclear reactor in the center of our system.

b) Nuclear technology is still decidedly low-tech compared with what you´d need for interstellar travel. Just that some of us think it´s the greatest thing since the big bang doesn´t mean anybody else does.  Wink/being sarcastic

c) Basically the only resources on earth that can´t be found on lifeless planets would be the different kinds of fossil fuels. Not a big incentive for a civilization that can travel in space and could easily synthesize that stuff at a fraction of the energy it would take to import it from earth...

d) Apart from some understandable scientific curiosity, still: Why invade?

I just think the case against an invasion is a lot better than the one for it.
Not that I believe it mattered what I thought.  Wink/being sarcastic


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Which Is The Largest Ikea On Earth? posted Fri May 29 2009 02:05:37 by United Airline
Some Really Do Still Think The Earth Is Flat! posted Mon Aug 4 2008 13:03:29 by GDB
Forget Obama, WHO On Earth Is That Singing? posted Mon Nov 5 2007 13:36:59 by IFEMaster
Jesus Is Back On The Earth, And He Is In Florida posted Mon Feb 19 2007 23:51:36 by Rammstein
Earth Is Flat, Smoking Is Healthy, Iraq Has Wmd... posted Wed Jan 31 2007 20:39:16 by WellHung
What Is This. . . .? (Weird Google Earth Image) posted Tue Dec 12 2006 08:13:53 by Springbok747
And The Most Beautiful Place On Earth Is... posted Fri Oct 27 2006 18:14:44 by Thom@s
This Is Better Than Google Earth posted Fri Sep 29 2006 01:10:05 by VC10BOAC
Earth Is Billions Of Years Old -- Or 1000s? posted Fri May 19 2006 00:38:10 by Boeing757/767
Where Is Google Earth Centred? posted Sat Mar 11 2006 22:52:17 by Braybuddy