[ambrose]

I'm not too happy about there being no time table to go to Mars... and 2020 to return to the Moon? We were able to make it to the Moon in 8 years from a standing start back in the 1960s!

[The_Victor]

We were able to make it to the Moon in 8 years from a standing start back in the 1960s!

In 1965, NASA's budget was $24,696,000,000 in FY2002 equivalent $s.

[RoughDobermann]

IIRC, the cost of Apollo alone was $25.4 billion, in 1960s dollars.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

I expect we will do this much faster than advertised. As one success builds on the next, excitement along with funding will grow. As it was, Congress never would have funded a manned mission to Mars. Now it's in the picture. By going to the Moon and learning to live off-planet and preparing for the Mars trip, it's viewed as the goal. As soon as the country understands how much we can benefit from lunar resources, it will be much easier to ask for more funding. Things will accelerate as the process unfolds.

[Mr.Atos]

I can understand the fuzzy timetable on Mars, as much of the technology required has yet to be developed and will evolve with moon excursions. The Moon timetable is, I agree, to 'conservative.' I recognize the need for caution considering the fact that we need to scrap and replace the Space Shuutle program first. But, I certainly believe that we could get there by 2010, and the significance of the date would have held some science fictional irony. Additionally, a 2010 committment would have made it Democrat proof. The energy and momentum would be too strong in 2008 to be scrapped by a Democrat president. A 2020 timetable is subject to bureaucratic laziness and political redirection.

[Joe Hadenuf]

We were able to make it to the Moon in 8 years from a standing start back in the 1960s!

Agree...

[BlacKnight]

Hey Californians, GW was right…. No Illegal Aliens here!! /A>