[rktman]

WOW! Did he just find out on the news? I could have told him that on 7/21/2011 at wheel stop. But the more important mission is of course reaching out to those many, many muslim contributors and being more inclusive of all they brought to the table. Not saying there weren't any engineers from some of the ME countries, but leading the way? Uh, no. Maybe this genius can find something else to do like his fellow genius mark kelley-giffords.

[9thLife]

but, what will happen to the self-esteem of muslims!!!

[DoughtyOne]

We spend three times the cost of the space station each year...

On welfare...

[Texas Eagle]

Because both countries are dependent upon one another, the $140 billion station would be lost.

A) We are NOT dependent on Russia. We can restart the program at any time and build our own damn useless space station.

B) What is Russia dependent on us for?

[Starstruck]

Because both countries are dependent upon one another, the $140 billion station would be lost.

Couldn't Russia just keep sending their guys up there. What could we do about it?

[Armando Guerra]

I bet there would be a buyer at the right price. First orbiting hotel and it would probably be profitable.

[Star Traveler]

Ummm ... this is kind of a “no-brainer” ... LOL ...

OF COURSE there won’t be any space station if the two main partners who are dependent upon each other quits being partners. That’s kind of a “DUH!” ... :-) ...

[zek157]

NASA can still accomplish the all important goal of Muslim outreach without the station.

[PROCON]

[Paladin2]

NASA should concentrate on adjusting historical Erf temperatures to prove global warming.

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

Space EEOP strikes. However, NASA does have Muslim outreach. They cannot make or fire a rocket but they serve a great HALAL meal.

[Vince Ferrer]

Unbeknownst to many, there is a little known company call Bigelow Aerospace quietly gearing up in North Las Vegas. They build space habitat modules that can be used in orbit, on the moon, or on Mars. Their modules are bigger, better, and cheaper than the modules we built the space station with. SpaceX reusable rockets + Bigelow modules = Cities in space. Forget the Russians. Give them the old clunky station.

2014 Bigelow Aerospace Promotional Video

[PapaBear3625]

Sept 2014 press release: NASA SELECTS SPACEX TO BE PART OF AMERICA’S HUMAN SPACEFLIGHT PROGRAM:

Today, NASA selected SpaceX’s Falcon 9 launch vehicle and Dragon spacecraft to fly American astronauts to the International Space Station under the Commercial Crew Program. SpaceX is deeply honored by the trust NASA has placed in us, and we welcome today’s decision and the mission it advances with gratitude and seriousness of purpose. Under the $2.6 billion contract, SpaceX will launch the Crew Dragon spacecraft atop the Falcon 9 launch vehicle from Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Florida.

Commercial crew demo missions manifested for Dragon 2 and CST-100

Mission planners at NASA have installed four Commercial Crew demonstration missions into the International Space Station (ISS) manifest. Both SpaceX’s Dragon 2 (V2) and Boeing’s CST-100 will conduct uncrewed and crewed qualification missions – beginning as early as December, 2016 – prior to the awarding of the US Crew Vehicle -1 (USCV-1) mission for NASA.

Personally, I would be in favor of using BOTH SpaceX and Boeing (assuming both demonstrate comparable mission-worthiness). It's good to have at least two vendors, in case one has issues.

[FlingWingFlyer]

... the $140 billion station would be lost.

One of those, "if a tree falls in the forest" kinds of things to me. The space station IS NOT space exploration, IMHO.

[PIF]

They’re going to pull out the Russian built pieces in a few years anyway - to use in their own station. And we will have no access to that one at all, just the way the One likes it.

[PIF]

Russia plans to create own space station by 2024
http://rt.com/news/235299-russia-space-station-2024/

[jz638]

There is a critical flaw in the aerospace industry where manned space flight is automatically assumed to be the proper role of a space program.

The sunk costs of the ISS as well as the immense costs to recreate the station justify to me its continued operation, but The ISS could be operated remotely for less cost and longer duration than it is currently with constant manning. Aperiodic manned missions can be sent up as needed for tasks requiring a human in the station.

The retrofitting of the station to operate remotely would be a good investment by NASA and one with additional mission value, like preparations for a potentially manned moon station and satellite maintenence.