Did you notice the one thing I repeated? Outer Rim? Let's tackle this in stages, since I find that easiest. 1) You are attempting to solve the galaxies problems. This includes destroying poverty, creating education, homes, and rebuilding infrastructure. I would contend that the task that you have set you organization up for (a none-profit organization I might add) is too grand a scheme, and that you will inevitably not only go bankrupt, but fail horribly. Therefore, I would say that you must reassess what you trying to accomplish. An Example is: UNICEF, providing shelter and food for those in poverty. Restrict yourself to a specific task (such as education, or shelter/food, or homes) so that you can best provide for those that seek your aid. 2) you are tackling the entire Outer Rim. It would be best if you have one planet as a primary place which you want to help, and maybe as sponsorship grows you can expand to other planets. I think though, for the sake of maintaining a realistic approach, any organization would be restricted to either helping 3 planets to the fullest of their capacity, or minorly helping 15-20 planets (because resources would be scarce the more planets you take on).

Now the second problem. As a low-tech agricultural world (and I can't believe I am going to say that), I don't think Mowgle could afford a Corellian gunship (which I will assume is a Tartan Patrol Cruiser), and I don't even think would require 12 T-Wing starfighters. However, as Mowgle is a huge planet, I could presumably see an increase in it's militia rate, but a decrease in it's naval superiority. That being say, I believe a figure more along these lines is workable:
6 x T-Wing Starfighters
1,200 Mowgle Militia

Keep in mind the militia has to oversee the protection of the -entire- planet.

Anyway, for this request, I must unfortunately MOTION TO DENY both, feel free to repost a new application with requests should this one end up denied. Thank you.

As for the charity, that is unfortunately a matter that I would continue to have to disagree with Jace on. While it is safe to say that not all charities, corporations, and PC organizations will be effective or efficient (or crumble entirely) we lack a method with which to keep events and organizations within the scope of realism. To simplify, I was AGAINSTthe organization not because I thought that it was a stupid idea that would flounder, but because unless Management wishes to assume responsibilityand monitor the corporation, we really have no means of saying whether the corporation is failing or succeeding beyond what Fowlkes would say. This means that this organization (which should be failing) can theoretically strive and solve the Outer Rim problems! Because we have no workable simulation system with which to show the unpracticality of the whole organization. So again, unless management is willing to monitorand watch this organization develop and help with simulating it's probability of success, I can not support a measure of something that may or may not fall under a category of realism.

I could be wrong however, and I welcome further input on the matter. In the meantime, I respectfully petition another member of Management to break the current stalemate (although I do concede that the military request is in APPROVALwhich is a change from my previous stance.

and with two votes for, you can consider the request APPROVED