On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 08:29:01 -0500, Mike Coslo wrote:

Leo wrote:
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 22:44:04 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:



Leo wrote:

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:15:37 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:



Doggone it Dee! Your factual post is going to ruin another anti-US rant!


No rant intended, Mike. Just looking for facts!

You wouldn't happen to have any on you, would you?

Facts? I have the history I've read.


I'll have to take that as a 'no' then....


Do you always take history as fact?

Not always, Mike. Depends on whether the source of the historical
information quotes verifiable references or not. Otherwise, it's just
the opinion of the writer.

I never take hearsay as fact, however.

The fact is, other countries were back on the air well before the ARRL
was successful in restoring amateur privileges in the US. Neither the
US nor the ARRL was responsible for the restoration of amateur
privileges in other sovereign nations.

Perhaps the ARRL overstated its importance in the lobbying for the
return of Amateur privileges as well - in recent history, the FCC does
not always follow their suggestions (incentive licensing comes to
mind, for one). Maybe the Government would have told the military to
back off and get out of the radio monopolization business? If the
military had been successful, there would have been no commercial
radio either - just military.

But hey, if you're lobbying for something and it ends up going your
way, then you get to claim that you made it happen, right! Even if it
would have happened anyway - who's to disagree?


FWIW, I have read that the US amateurs and their representatives were
pretty much the driving force in Amateur radio post WW1. The numbers of
Amateurs in the US was roughly equal to the Amateurs in the rest of the
world. These numbers coupled with a few organizations that represented
them from one country instead of spread out over the globe, would
naturally have a major influence on the hobby/avocation.

If the international unions were structured like corporations, that
would be true. The US would have a majority share, and could
implement anything that they wanted based upon the number of
'shareholders' (amateurs, in this case) that they represented.

In reality, it's not structured like that at all. Otherwise, how would
comparitively small countries like Albania or Turkey have any chance
of having their national interests recognized?


Now I don't know that for sure, since I wasn't around then, but it seems
sensible and logical enough, so I assign it a good probability.

Perhaps they were a driving force - but if they hadn't been (i.e. if
the US military had successfully locked them out after WW1), why on
Earth would the rest of the planet have abandoned amateur radio? It
might have been different, and ther might have been contention between
US military traffic and the rest of the world - but I really don't
believe for a second that the US influence over the amateur policies
of the rest of the world was ever that strong. Not then - and not
today.

Historically speaking.


- Mike KB3EIA

73, Leo