For instance, when Columbus finally hit land in 1492 he hopped out and placed a flag and claimed the new land for Spain. Since, the USA is the only country to have gone to the moon and since the astronauts placed a flag on the moon is it the property of the USA?
Nobody owns the Moon. Having a flag there means jack bull. It is an international preserve by treaty, a treaty we signed.
And amazingly enough, the relevant treaty was ratifed in October 1967, so it was in place before we landed on the moon. Here’s the important part:
Derleth is 100% correct. The moon can be no country’s property due to a treaty to that effect.
Of course, possession is 9/10 of the law. While no one can ‘own’ the moon I’m sure of you started building there you might claim significant portions as ‘yours’ while not actually owning it.
What would happen if the moon became an economically profitable place to buid or mine I have no idea but I bet it would get ugly.
Didn’t the USSR successfuly complete a moon mission? Or am I imagining things again?
How’d you like that…simulpost and SmackFu’s quote dismisse the notion of ownership via use.
However, I can’t imagine someone building a military base or mining operation allowing another country or competitor to setup shop right next to them either.
Then again it could be like the high seas where Russian ‘fishing’ trawlers regularly hung near US Naval battle groups. I’m not sure what the US navy considered ‘too close’ for those ships but by international law I suppose the tralwer could sail between the naval ships if the trawler’s captain had brass ones between his legs.
Define successful mission.
The US is the only country to ever land a person on the moon.
I believe the Russians sent probes that landed on the moon (actually crashed into the moon might be more appropriate).
I have no idea but other countries may have sent probes as well. However, once the US won the race to the moon and given that it’s mostly a dull place (except to astronomers) I think most countries saw no reason to go to the expense of sending more people or probes.
freido, the USSR never made it to the Moon. They tried, but we were the first, the last, and the only nation to put humans on the Moon. And our only losses were the three tragic deaths in the Apollo 1 fire.
(I suppose we can tell who’s online right now.)
The USSR never landed a person on the moon.
They completed plenty of missions though. They had the first spacecraft to impact the moon, Luna 2 in 1959. They also had the first spacecraft to make a nice landing and take photos, Luna 9 in 1966. They even managed to return a sample to the Earth using a robotic probe on Luna 16, but that was in 1970, after Apollo 11 & 12.
Interesting trivia about Luna 2: “The spacecraft also carried Soviet pennants”. So the USSR does have the claim of placing their flag first.
Well, yeah, they got probes up there, sure. I thought freido meant manned missions.
Hey, simulpost!
So why would any nation sign such a treaty. I just dont understand why it was necessary (sp?) Unless it was signed just to hedge our bets. But what about countries that didnt sign the treaty? Can they still claim the moon?
Well, I would have thought that the treaty doesn’t actually mean a hell of a lot. I mean, there is also one about weapons in space, which is simply ‘no longer valid’. A better way to put that would be ‘was never valid’.
Excuse a couple of random-arse guesses here on how the American system works, but here goes. International Treaties have absolutely no effect unless specifically incorporated into the domestic law. Well, no legal effect. Countries pay heed to them, cause if you don’t things can get a tad uncivilised, but it is a choice, and not a legal point (unless the treaty has been incorporated, as mentioned). Therefore, the US could pass a law claiming sovereignty over the moon. The UK could then recognise that sovereignty by passing a law to the effect of ‘The US has sovereignty over the moon’. To all legal effect in the countries that chose to recognise the claim, the US would have sovereign control of the moon. After all, that’s how all sovereignty works around the globe, it is just what is chosen as being recognised.
So, in response to the OP, the US does not have sovereignty. But it could. And China could claim sovereignty immediately afterwards. And finally, so could you. Good luck getting it recognised, and I wouldn’t mind a crater if it is.
Excuse how badly worded all of this reply is.
1st of all in order to own land a country must be able to defend it against all challenging nation. Yes we could send missiles to blow up any development that springs up there, but that just makes it ‘no man’s land’.
By signing the treaty - we eliminated (or postponed) and other challenges. This could be used as a ploy to develop it and send troops to defend it. Then we can claim ownership.
When Columbus claimed the new world (or the island he landed on) for Spain he was there and could defend it against (limited) attack. Also other nations (and even Spain) didn’t know of the new land. When he abandoned it to return the claim was gone and a new occupying force could have moved in (if they knew about it).
Lets put it another way - did you ever play a war sim game like civ or C&C or AoE. If you did you know that the basic idea is to use resources to defeat your opponent. One of my strategies is to find some island (or other out of the way place) with resources and start a small development there to exploit the resources so if my primary resources are damaged I will still have some income. (or if destroyed, sometimes I will have fun having them look for me).
Back to the point I was making-
on the island I land the villagers and maybe some troops- I sort of claim as mine. As long as no one knows about it- that’s fine and it might grow and be able to defend itself. But sometimes an enemy warship passes by and kills everyone there. Do I still ‘own’ the island?. No, I have abandoned it (like the US and the moon) but at this point no one else owns it either.
So ownership of a new piece of territory, such as the moon, is based on force? If you can defend it then it is yours? Do you think it will ever come to that with regard to the moon?
The ability to exercise control over territory by force is a basic test of statehood. A country really isn’t a country unless it can use force to enforce its will over its own territory. That deosn’t mean you have to have an invincible army, but basic control like enforcing lawsd and borders is a pretty fundamental test of sovereignty.
So if you’re planning to exercise sovereignty over the moon, you have to be able to show it by exercising a presence in force. Otherwise you could just lay claim to anywhere; “Venus belongs to me. I said it first! Stamp it, no erases, black magic, king’s power, triple-stamped!”
As to whether or not it will come to that… why would you want the Moon? It’s just a big rock. There isn’t much useful stuff on it.
From the Britannica:
Classically, the answer to your first two questions would likely have been “yes”. We have begun to move away from that view with the introduction of concepts like international law and democratic self-determination. As for the third question, that’s sort of what the Outer Space Treaty is supposed to prevent.
we could always pass a law saying we do own the moon - other countries could “fight us” over it, and the international ramifications may be nasty (or maybe not…)… but the law would not be unconstitutional for superceeding a treaty. Quite the opposite - that section of the treaty would be overruled by the (federal) statute.
Also, we could say we own the moon via adverse possession - our flag has been there over 10 years (usually the Statute of limitations in AP cases) and any other country has in effect waived their right to claim the moon for not using it or putting a flag on it ever since we did. Hell, nobody else has even so much as complained about our flag there.
Another option would be to attach the condition that “you waive all rights to the moon” to any monetary handout the US gives to any country. Most likely, if they want to get their free money, they will say “sure whatever” and waive their rights to the moon. If every country waives their rights to the moon except the US, the moon is in effect OURS. Then we can put big brights signs up there that says “USA! USA!! USA!!!” for every other country to look at, as 90% of their citizens starve and rot to death.
Capitalism rules.
**
[/QUOTE]
As I said, specific domestic incorporation of the treaty. You could change the constitution, and then be back to square one.
And also, is that section actually applied? HOw does that work, for example, with the non-proliferation treaty in space? No wait, that’s a thread hijack.
Maybe another time.