Mars Mission a Trojan Horse?

Wired News ^ | 02:00 AM Jan. 16, 2004 PT | Suneel Ratan

[vannrox]

President Bush's plan to go to the moon and to Mars without much additional funding will force NASA and Congress to make hard choices -- particularly regarding the space shuttle and the hugely expensive International Space Station, observers said.

The Bush plan increases NASA's budget by just $1 billion over the next five years. That means the space agency has to figure out how to carry out the mission -- first a return to the moon and later a trip to Mars -- without a lot of additional money in its budget.

[vannrox]

Hum.

[John Beresford Tipton]

"President Bush's plan to go to the moon and to Mars without much additional funding will force NASA and Congress to make..."

Pigs fly out of their butts?

[taxcontrol]

Offer $1 Billion for the first ton of He3 returned from the moon. NASA sets the prize money aside and keeps doing what it has been doing. Possibly sells shuttle payload space along the way.

BTW, He3 is excellent fusion material and it emits very little radiation.

[debg]

Why oh why do these writers fail to acknowledge the fact that countries across the globe are attempting the same thing? China, India, Brazil, Japan, and just today, Europe...are announcing similar programs.

[Atlas Sneezed]

I've been saying from the beginning that Bush's announcement was essentially about canning the shuttle.

[Servant of the 9]

I've been saying from the beginning that Bush's announcement was essentially about canning the shuttle.

Jimmy Carter's budget cuts resulted in a crippled shuttle that was a shadow of the original proposal. It should have died long ago.

The Russians, despite being dead broke and using equipment obsolete before the first shuttle was built have maintained a better delivery record than we have.

May Carter return in his next life as a hemheroid on the ass of a stray dog.

So9

[bayourod]

The real objective is to establish a military/communications/spy base on the moon. Satellites are much too vulnerable now that dozens of nations have space programs.

Our military would be blind and deaf if our military satellites were destroyed.

The Mars part is just a cover for spending far more money than a nonmilitary base on the moon would justify, especially the R&D.

[martian_22]

***Why oh why.....***

I hope it's not because we're being set-up to be told, "It has to be an International undertaking...Due the the enormous costs, etc..."

The medias will do their job only when the times are right. We have the opportunity on FR to read the news that mostly never gets reported or outright buried.

[DannyTN]

Interesting proposal.

How much He3 is there on the moon?

Is there an advantage to obtaining He3 from the moon over the earth?

Shouldn't we wait until fusion is more advanced?

[DannyTN]

"The real objective is to establish a military/communications/spy base on the moon. Satellites are much too vulnerable now that dozens of nations have space programs."

I do think military superiority is a key concern for our space program.

How is a moon base superior to satellites. It seems like a moon base would be easier to track and possibly destroy. But I'm not certain of this.

[squidly]

Just as easy to track, but about impossible to destroy (from earth).

[webheart]

Shouldn't we wait until fusion is more advanced?

Sounds like my kids: "Shouldn't I have a car before I get a job?"

[Robe]

We've researched this stuff to death.. As the old Navy saying goes .,..it's "time to kick the tire and light the fire, first one in the air leads and we'll brief on the way !!!
( Well OK it MAY be and Old AAF saying)

(:^)

[debg]

It will be phrased by the liberal media that it is a huge expense we can't afford. Yet the mainstream new will never mention that, China, India, Brazil, Japan, and just today, Europe...are announcing similar programs.

[kanawa]

The real objective is to establish a military/communications/spy base on the moon. Satellites are much too vulnerable now that dozens of nations have space programs. Our military would be blind and deaf if our military satellites were destroyed.

It would only cover half the Earth at any given time.

[Cicero]

The international space station is a monstrously wasteful and pointless political boondoggle whose only purpose was to show that the US and the Soviet Union could work together despite the Cold War.

Now that the Soviet Union no longer exists, and Russia has said it wants out of this wasteful program even though we pay most of their expenses, because it still costs them too much money, why not recognize reality and give it the axe?

[dead]

Me too. It's also about maintaining our 40 year old head start on China. If they're going into space, we better get serious again about our program.

The ISS is the UN office with the highest rent. And the shuttle is just its taxi. There's no reason for us to continue to subsidize a bunch of Japanese, Russian, and Romanian astronauts' joy rides.

We'll send them "Wish You Were Here" greetings from Mars.

[dead]

It would only cover half the Earth at any given time.

That's the "glass is half empty" view.

The "glass is half full" interpretation is that we'd never be more than 12 hours away from a view.

[Phil V.]

If you'd like to be on or off this MARS ping list please FRail me