> very strict on this issue, and I always got the impression that the
I've often wondered about this. If the UNSC is formed up from the member
nations, then it seems that its technology would be limited to what the member
nations donated. IN fact, considering its funding, personnel, logistics etc
come from member nations, I would have thought the UNSC to be actually weaker
than the member navies, especially considering that the
member nations are at war, and have thus a huge build-up. The UNSC, at
least as I understood it, is a defensive force, charged with policing the
core-worlds. I imagined that the UNSC's strength was actually in its
ability to tip the balance, considering its third-party neutral status.
No one seriously challenges the UNSC because they can't afford to lose ships
in a battle against them, nor can they afford the sanctions that would be
imposed.
George
> stranger wrote:
> I've often wondered about this. If the UNSC is formed up from the
All very good points, but there is another one to consider. Each of the member
nations has its own strengths and weaknesses (NSL are beam-whores, but
few/no
screens, FSE are missile/fighter heavy, NAC goes for all-around ship
design, etc.), but the UNSC could be unfettered by such rigid design doctrine.
IMNSHO, the fleet which most closely approaches this is the ESU, but even they
have an aversion to missiles and torpedoes. If we assume that the UNSC is
getting its
basic tech and components from the other member-states, then it is also
not unreasonable to assume that they would therefore have more money to use
for
research, and possibly/probably people dedicated to improving their tech
so that
the member-states will listen to them when need be. I envision the UNSC
as a smaller fleet, given their mandate of preventing conflict within the core
colonies, but with ships that are, unit for unit, more powerful than those of
other navies. In other words, another navy or navies could conceivably smoke
the UNSC if they so chose to do so, but would probably take such grievous
losses that they would be easy meat for the remaining powers, which lines up
nicely with your "neutral third party" statement. Besides, the UNSC no longer
rotates personnel from the member states following the defection of the limey
who stole the torpedo schematics, but instead recruits people who will be
loyal only to and serve only the UNSC.
Another point to consider is that while the UN will have a smaller fleet, it
would want to be more powerful, so as to "stare down" possible threats, and
nifty new tech is a really really good way to do that
> On Tue, 13 Mar 2001 20:48:32 -0800 mreindl@pacbell.net writes:
<snip>
> with your "neutral third party" statement. Besides, the UNSC no
That's the unrealized dream on every piece of any countries Intelligence
Community members. And I repeat the unrealized part. Ask the FBI...
I have taken a slightly different turn on the UNSC.
The UN is still made up of the governments of the inner sphere (and some Rim
states).
In 2014, Spain takes Gibraltar from Britain. The EC refuses to take military
or economic action (Cannon to this point). Britain (and tacitly the US) push
for the UN to step in. The EC uses its veto power to keep the UN peacekeeping
forces from interfering. Britain and the US call for an independent
peacekeeping force for the UN, made up of permanent, professional soldiers.
The EC, Russia, and China balk at this idea.
In 2027, the destruction of Israel again brings calls for an independent UN
force. The motion is barely defeated.
In 2037, the destruction of Delhi by Sikh fundamentalist provides the last
straw. The UN is granted the right to train, keep, and deploy its own
professional army. Volunteer forces are still provided by member nations,
however.
This proves to be a timely move as the world enters into the "Time of
Consolidation" (2039-2123). The UNP (UN Peacekeepers) grows over this
time as soldiers leave "consolidated" territories and would rather fight for
the UN than for the conquerors.
The largest influxes are in 2047 Coup in Moscow. Many join the RH forces, many
join the UN.
2050-2057 2nd American Civil War.
2072 LLAR looses Earth holdings
Although the UNP is semi-independent, it still has to deal with pressure
and
vetoes of the UN member-states.
2137-2142 The First Solar War
2143 The horrors of the First Solar War brings the UN to create the United
Nations Space Command (UNSC). This force is charged with security of shipping
in the inner colonies. To this end it is given autonomy as a
member-state of the UN and is funded in a major way through tariffs on
goods and travel within the inner colonies. The UNP is folded into the UNSC at
this time also. This gives the UNSC an income independent of the UN
member-state donations and thus greater independence of action.
2145 The Second Solar War. With the outbreak of the 2nd Solar War, the calls
to bring the UNSC back under control of the Political UN quietly die away as
the need for an independent force becomes clear.
The independent nature of this peacekeeping force is attractive to many and
they have no problem recruiting members for forces, scientists for research
and exploration, and funding from philanthropists.
Anyway, that's my take on them.
-----
Brian Bell bkb@beol.net
-----
> -----Original Message-----
Hell All,
I have to say Brian has put into words how I have seen the UNSC
as well. Although Brian is much more elequint then I :-)
Well done Brian.
Daniel
> -----Original Message-----
Howdy Brian,
At the risk of spinning this thread out of control... (8-)
> "Bell, Brian K (Contractor)" wrote:
[MUNCH]
> 2145 The Second Solar War. With the outbreak of the 2nd Solar War, the
Actually, that's the hardest part to understand about the UNSC. If the UNSC is
technologicially advanced, the smallest of the 'great powers', and is still
controlled by the other powers (by funding, if nothing else), then it's almost
impossible for them to be 'left alone.' The current UN is a broiling pot of
politics, patronage, and what remaining idealists there are on the
international scene.
Thus, there has to be a clean break somewhere. The UN of 2183 is not the same
institution of 2001. Totally different organization, with the same name as the
original UN. In particular, there has to be no security council, and there has
to be some sort of funding independence, as space navies are expensive. It
also has to be a politically savy organization, playing off the great powers
against each other.
I agree that the UNSC (UNP/ UNSC Marine Corps) have to be
professional, well-trained, and well equipped, since they will
almost always be fighting outnumbered and with the initative toward their
opponent. The recruitment problem is something else I'm wrestling with, as
most countries will not take lightly having their citizens abandon their
citizenship and join the UNSC, nor, can I see the UNSC allowing their ships to
be crewed by volunteers from member nations. But, everything we've seen and
heard suggests an fairly effective force, which suggests that they must have
their own recruitment pool somewhere, independent of the other great powers.
Trying to figure out how to do this without a) putting together a bunch of
impossible events or b) turning the GZG world on its ear is what's keeping me
from updating the UN webage at the GZGPedia.
*shrug*
BTW -- just as a heads up -- the UNSC developing the P-Torp, and
later having it stolen by the NAC is not GZG canon. Somebody on the list came
up with it.
Thanks, JGH
> >with your "neutral third party" statement. Besides, the UNSC no
Sounds very idealistic.
> That's the unrealized dream on every piece of any countries
...Too idealistic.
There has to be a reason to be loyal. Brian Bell's response to this provides a
very nice reason for loyalty. (Correct me if I missed the point Brian) In his
version, those displaced by being conquered, or due to civil war, etc, joined
the UN because basically, they had no where else to go, and putting their lot
in with them was better than the alternative. In effect the UN becomes a
nation....
<MAJOR SNIPPAGE>
> Actually, that's the hardest part to understand about the UNSC. If
I run two FT campaigns, one in a Cyberpunk-Traveler universe, and the
second in the Cyberpunk universe. (Rather, I use the FT rules to resolve space
combat in both of these RP campaigns with occasional small-unit actions
etc. along with DS. SG is problematic...)
In the CP campaign the UN has become a major power simply due to outside
interests deciding that there needed to be "neutral force" to counteract
both nation-states and corporate interests. Through various means and a
certain amount of luck the UN became this neutral party and makes it's money
off of taxation on orbital and interplanetary traffic and whatnot.
> I agree that the URNS (UNP/ UNSC Marine Corps) have to be
The UN in my game has it's own passports (as I think is possible now...) and
there has been the same issue with people joining the UN forces after being
dissatisfied with their current situation. I would say that since the UN is
not a nation-state in it's own right that it is difficult at best to get
a "UN passport" simply by applying. You have to have a skill that they want
and/or can use at the time that you apply. They pay well, have a great
mission statement, and supply neat toys to play with... More people apply than
they accept, this keeps the other Powers happy.
> Trying to figure out how to do this without a) putting together a
In my case it was a couple of things, have a couple of *serious* accidents
in space that would have given the member-states of the UN a reason to
allow the creation of an independent force to police space (see the 4th Corp.
War in the CP timeline by RTG for a couple of ideas), and then have it paid
for by taxes and tariff's that it levies itself (but determined by the UN).
Once that occurs it is simply a matter of time until the current rather vague
situation develops.
We're talking over 100 years of FTL travel BTW, that's plenty of time for all
sorts of mission drift and incremental change in mission statements...
I know what you mean... how can you have a truly "independent" force? You have
to live somewhere, and as far as I know, there's no separate "Independent UN
Territory" on the GZG world map.
Culturally, your upbringing is going to be shaped by the country you grow up
in, and if you decide to be a UNSC Marine once you turn 18, then you'd have to
renounce your nation in order to become "independent". And your countrymen are
most likely going to regard you as a traitor, especially if you come back to
"restore the peace" in your old neighborhood...
At best, the UN could have a permanent, well-organized force of
mercenaries, but I can't imagine that they'd ever be as numerous
or (potentially) well-motivated as a national army.
-- Rick "Bulletproof" Rutherford
[quoted original message omitted]
> On 14 Mar 2001, at 11:49, Jerry Han wrote:
I thought that someone came up with that idea in an Old Ragnarok (that's the
journal of the Society of Fantasy and Science Fiction Wargamers) article.
That's certainly the first place I saw it. I can dig out the details tonight
if anyone's interested.
I wouldn't bet on that. Historically there have been several mercenary
organizations which have been just as well disciplined and motivated as any
national army. The French Foreign Legion is one example, and the
Swiss and Irish mercenaries of the 18th/19th Centuries are another.
Jerry Pournelle's "Co-Dominion" series of books offers a solid sci-fi
basis for just such an "independent" military force.
> gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu wrote:
You have to live somewhere, and as far as I know, there's no separate
"Independent UN Territory" on the GZG world map.
Culturally, your upbringing is going to be shaped by the country you grow up
in, and if you decide to be a UNSC Marine once you turn 18, then you'd have to
renounce your nation in order to become "independent". And your countrymen are
most likely going to regard you as a traitor, especially if you come back to
"restore the peace" in your old neighborhood...
At best, the UN could have a permanent, well-organized force of
mercenaries, but I can't imagine that they'd ever be as numerous
or (potentially) well-motivated as a national army.
-- Rick "Bulletproof" Rutherford
[quoted original message omitted]
From: Corey Burger burgundavia@crosswinds.net
> Another point to consider is that while the UN will have a smaller
Heck, *I* want nifty new tech too. That doesn't mean that I get it. But I
can't see the EvilUN being less bureaucratic, more focussed, or better at
research than the major powers. IIRC, even that "UN designed
the PTorp" bit is non-canon.
Now, the Present Day Evil UN is beginning to talk about using mercenaries,
instead of contingents provided by various countries, on the theory that mercs
are less likely to botch peacekeeping missions than the current jumble of
national contingents and no one cares if the mercs get killed anyway. Please
note that the PDE UN is not fielding Abrams, Apaches, assault carriers, etc.
Once their insidious plot to control the world moves along and they have a
chance to build standing military forces....then contributor nation A will
"forget to pay" until they get the tank contract, nation B will hold out until
they get the fighter contract, and so forth.
I suppose in 200 years it's theoretically possible that they could
become competent and efficient (and ethical too--if you're going to
dream, dream big). Probably *after* New York gets nuked.
> --- Rick Rutherford <Rick@esr.com> wrote:
Not necessarily. The French Foreign Legion experience shows that elite units
can be fashioned out of citizenless mercenaries (not particularly well paid
ones at that), and if the UNSC managed to create a similar sort of image and
ethos for its armed forces it could be assured of a steady flow of candidates.
UNSC can also follow the British example ("Space Gurkhas"), although I am not
sure whether there exists a similar pool of recruits in GZG universe for UNSC
to tap.
> Corey Burger wrote:
> Another point to consider is that while the UN will have a smaller
The problem with the UN having better toys than the others is that the UN is
funded by the member states and the FSE, NAC, and ESU control the permenent
seats of the security council (a continuing sorepoint to the NSL). The UNSC is
not going to have a fleet large enough to do more than annoy the FSE, NAC, or
ESU, as it is against their interests.
I actually envision the UNSC fleet having modern small vessels, but the larger
ships are provided by the major powers to keep shipyards busy. Given the
economic difficulties of prosecuting wars, it would not be too surprising if
the major powers paid their dues "donating" vessels that would take too long
to fix to be of further use in the current conflict. The UNSC fleet would have
no trouble facing down the PAU, Islamic Federation, or any of the lesser
powers, but it is not in the same league as the big four.
I suspect that the UN in Tuffleyverse is still petitioning the NAC for the
back dues owed by the former-USA.
> I suspect that the UN in Tuffleyverse is still
LOL!
Although I am unsure I agree with either side all of the way, I have always
thought of the UNSC as having grown powerful more from the big four attempting
to trump each other rather then the UNSC being held back by the four.
I also liked the comment Laiserlight made about the exchange of "dues" for
contracts. He said "...they [UN] have a chance to build standing military
forces then contributor nation A will "forget to pay" until they get the tank
contract, nation B will hold out until they get the fighter contract, and so
forth." I think we could take it even further with the UN saying to member
nation A, "we will wave your dues this year for X number of weapon system Z.."
Just a thought...
> On 14 Mar 2001, at 17:37, Richard and Emily Bell wrote:
> The problem with the UN having better toys than the others is that
Isn't that assuming that the current permanet seats pass down to
their political inheritors without any changes (UK and USA - NAC,
China and Russia - ESU and France - FSE). Over two centuries and
several major wars? I'd say that was highly unlikely.
If the security council still exists I would say that the four main powers
would each have a permanent seat, the fifth permanent seat, if one exists, may
be an appointee from within the UN itself.
> steve@pugh.net wrote:
> On 14 Mar 2001, at 17:37, Richard and Emily Bell wrote:
It may be that for simplicity, the number of permenent seats on the security
council has been reduced to three, as the UK and USA, and the Russians and
Chinese have each melded into a single state, but it is highly unlikely that
any new permenent seats have been formed, or vacant ones reassigned (as it
would be against the interests of the current occupants).
If the security council does not exist, then someone managed to dissolve the
UN and recreate it, but the only reason that the UN was formed at all was that
the US would have veto power (which it grudgingly shared with the other
victorious powers, along with France and China). The League of Nations failed
because it did not provide a means for the powerful nations to ignore it, and
without their full support, no one else really supported it either.
There is no reason besides artistic license for the UN in Tuffleyverse to be
any better. Possibly, the UN quietly dissolved when even the US was no longer
a superpower, but before the rise of the new empires. Then a much broadened
NATO expanded, until it made sense to change the name to the UN. This scenario
still prevents the UNSC from having any fancy toys, but the funding picture is
better, as the member states pay all of the expenses. Out of politeness, the
vessels of nations warring outside of the core are interned for the duration
of the conflict. So long as all four of the major powers are not warring with
each other simultaneously, the system works pretty well.
> I could stand such a definition BUT... how come they are
I must be missing something, I don't recall any references to the UNSC being
more technologically advanced than anyone else.
In message <006a01c0b019$24739740$8050fea9@stranger>
> "stranger" <stranger@cvn.net> wrote:
> > I could stand such a definition BUT... how come they are
Well, for FT, its ever since GZG produced _those_ space-craft (no, not
the Phalons!) - especially the ones with the hole in the bow :-).
IIRC JonT asked the list which nation he should assign them to :-)
In SG, it was earlier, with the SG UNSC troops _all_ wearing powered
hardsuits!
It could be a way of JonT not playing favourites with 'high-tech'
figures - as the UNSC _could_ be considered to be made of a piece of
everyone ;-)
Or I could be making wild, unfounded guesses here!