Search results

*straightens three inch thick glasses* Leaving out the full name of WASP was a gaff but luckily not an essential element. By taking away protection, I mean, WASP will not try to protect the object from debris. So while no one will destroy debris heading towards it on a collision course, it...

Good news! Because of a misunderstanding by the mods (in which they believed WASP labeling an object as debris was somehow forcing non WA nations to do something), we now have the opportunity to do a quick draft while we get everything prepared for prime time... again... So that means that...

That is in flux and basically up to the determination of WASP. At best, the weapons platform doesn't actually pose a danger, its the armaments, and even those aren't immediately dangerous either. Once they do pose a danger, it ought to be as an act of war and thus immune completely. At worst...

I do wish I could attempt to address some of these issues. Would anyone care to state why they are against the proposal?

Hello all- I'm here to discuss the sister proposal to debris prevention, which will proactively reduce the amount of dangerous debris in orbit before it can harm your satellites of people on the ground. Unfortunately, because I did not consider discussing this in the north Pacific prior to...

If a nation can not effectively react to an object with aggressive tendencies because of the density of their own bureaucracy, that seems like its more of a fault in them. In addition, the destruction of an object that cost millions to create and launch should not be taken lightly so the fact...

Luckily we were able to get on the same page with time to spare.

After receiving a formal invitation, I'm here to campaign for my proposal in hopes that some votes man be swayed. I'm Angela Landfree, ambassador for Defwa. Now I did address the concerns posted here in another forum and I am unable to perfect the formatting, but here goes: From HMS Unicorn...