People on ATS like to go on and on about how sinister the supposed 'deal' Ike and the government made with the 'gray' aliens was (I think we're
all familiar with this piece of UFO folklore). My question for you all, though, is whether or not this deal was really unethical or if it was the
only remotely rational option he (may have) had.
In most versions of the story, Ike is confronted by gray aliens (after having met with another race of aliens) who offer him a deal wherein the aliens
would be allowed to abduct a limited number of people for simple medical examinations in exchange for advanced weapons and help developing spacecraft.
They also promise not to interfere with Earth politics or make alliances against the US. Ike agrees to this (the so-called Treaty of Gaeata in UFO
folklore circles) and, later on, the aliens leave a complete, working UFO with the government (as payment for their end of the deal).
Now... in our day and age the thought of aliens is inextricably linked with scary abduction stories... and so Ike has become something of a bad guy
within UFO circles (at least judging by the angry comments supposed 'NWO-resistors' throw at him), however... it seems to me that Ike not only had
no choice, but that he was shooting for the best possible outcome. This is because, having already demonstrated their superiority, the aliens could
have just taken what they wanted without even agreeing to the technological exchange. They also could have formed an alliance with the Soviet Union.
This way, at least, the US received some access (according to folklore) to alien weapons and propulsion technology. Even if the aliens are sinister
-- and even if these weapons will never be used on earth -- they provide, it seems to me, a type of insurance for human society. Think about it: We
trade people who were going to get abducted anyway for particle beams.... but, in turn, our possession of particle beams/directed energy weapons
ensures that, once this tech is fully developed, we can prevent earth from being attacked at will by aliens. The overall situation, then, is one
where we allowed ourselves to be used so as to get to the technology that can prevent us from getting used in the future. This, to me, seems like a
rational trade-off (if an unpleasant one).
Now... one can argue that the tech the aliens gave us might have been things that we were about to develop anyways... or that they're holding back...
but it seems clear that, when all is said and done, that they could have gotten more for less if they wanted to (did they even have to meet with
Ike?). One can also argue that the treaty gives the aliens the legal pretext to annex earth... but, hey, as it wasn't voted on by the Senate it
technically doesn't count (note how one of the biggest criticisms of the treaty is that it is 'illegal'... but, it seems to me, this illegality is
perhaps a pocket victory for humanity. After all, we got sample tech in exchange for a piece of paper we can later deny).
So... what are your thoughts?
Some reading on the Ike-alien treaty legend:
[edit on 21-10-2005 by onlyinmydreams]