Possible US Moon Shot

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2003-12-04 12:12pm

Report: Bush Wants Mission to the Moon

Thursday, December 04, 2003

By Brian Blomquist

WASHINGTON — an id="a10bl">

President Bush (search) wants to send Americans back to the moon — and may leave a permanent presence there — in a bold new vision for space exploration, administration officials said yesterday.

The return to the moon would be for the purpose of technological advancements in technology, including energy exploration and testing a military rocket engine.

And a permanent presence likely will include robots and communication satellites.

But beyond the nuts and bolts, Bush's call for a to return to space would give Americans something new to hope for - amid a period of permanent anxiety about terrorism. It would also help move NASA beyond last February's space shuttle Columbia disaster.

Sources said the president may also give the go-ahead to pursue a manned trip to Mars - a long range goal.

NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe (search) told an advisory council yesterday that 2004 will be a "seminal time" for the agency.

"There's an effort under way that will focus the administration's view very prominently on options we can consider. We are looking at some significant changes," O'Keefe said.

Bush could spell out his new plan for space travel on the 100-year anniversary of the Wright Brothers' first flight, Dec. 17, officials said.

The White House refused to comment on Bush's future plans for NASA, saying the president hasn't yet made a decision about what he'll announce.

But high-level meetings involving the White House and NASA have been going on for months.

Sources says Vice President Dick Cheney recently went up to Capitol Hill to meet with Rep. Sherwood Boehlert (R-N.Y.) and other key congressmen to discuss space exploration. They discussed resuming manned trips to the Moon, and even the idea of establishing a permanent station on the Moon, sources said.

If the president does announce his new space vision on Dec. 17, it would be 100 years after the Wright Brothers first set an airplane in flight in Kitty Hawk, N.C., and it would be two days before the 30th anniversary of the last manned lunar landing.

Two Texas Republican senators recently sent Bush a letter saying America's space program has been floundering.

"We urge you to elevate the priority of the space program and develop a bold and coherent national mission for NASA," wrote Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison (search) and John Cornyn (search).

This is just what we need to get the space program back on track and get more interest in space. Bravo!

Thirdfain · Post by **Thirdfain** » 2003-12-04 12:15pm

I hope to sweet jesus that this is true, and bears fruit. It is pretty clear to me that the best thing anyone can do for the planet and mankind is hasten our leavetaking from this pretty little blue orb. The sooner we take the step farther out, the sooner we can breathe a collective sigh of relief.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2003-12-04 12:29pm

this sounds promising. Bush is finally doing something that isn't going to draw large scale bad press to him.

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2003-12-04 12:38pm

sign me up for the first colony flight to an inhabitable planet and lets establish the ideal libertarian society! yippee!

Thirdfain · Post by **Thirdfain** » 2003-12-04 12:40pm

sign me up for the first colony flight to an inhabitable planet and lets establish the ideal libertarian society! yippee!

We'll see L5 and asteroid colonies long before planetary colonization, methinks.

GrandMasterTerwynn · Post by **GrandMasterTerwynn** » 2003-12-04 12:59pm

Yeah yeah yeah, every president since Ford has probably blown hot air about establishing a real space presence. Unfortunately, it's just that, hot air. A manned mission to Mars, or a manned presence on the Moon is about as likely to survive a trip through Congress as Ralph Nader is likely to ever get elected President (we still have a hard enough time as it is keeping the ISS funded at the levels it ought to be funded at.)

Of course, it is possible if you have a President and Congress willing to engage in ludicrous amounts of deficit spending . . . on something other than their pet pigs.

In the end, he may be shooting for the Moon, but he's going to have to settle for a nice high-rise apartment with a view. And that's assuming he and the Republican majority are even in office come January 22nd. 2005.

Embracer Of Darkness · Post by **Embracer Of Darkness** » 2003-12-04 01:35pm

Bush is only doing this to suck public ass. It's a step in the right direction though.

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2003-12-04 01:51pm

Who wants their taxes raised to pay for this? Or how much money should we take away from the military for this? I thought Republicans were for fiscal responsibility? If we were running surplus' I'd have no problem on this. But until then someone's program has to be whacked or taxes have to be raised.

Thirdfain · Post by **Thirdfain** » 2003-12-04 01:56pm

Who wants their taxes raised to pay for this? Or how much money should we take away from the military for this? I thought Republicans were for fiscal responsibility? If we were running surplus' I'd have no problem on this. But until then someone's program has to be whacked or taxes have to be raised.

In 2000 years, no one will give a shit who invaded Iraq, or whether or not abortions are legalized. They WILL care about how much effort was put into the space program.

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2003-12-04 02:06pm

Thirdfain wrote:
In 2000 years, no one will give a shit who invaded Iraq, or whether or not abortions are legalized. They WILL care about how much effort was put into the space program.

So you I take that as a Yes, you will pay more in taxes.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-12-04 02:12pm

How much money would be available if we retired the space shuttle and abandoned the ISS (white elephant that it is)? Not enough to pay for the whole thing, but certainly billions of dollars currently going down the toilet.

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2003-12-04 02:18pm

Yay give more money to an Agency that has killed Astronauts out of sheer negilgence!!!

Yippe!!!

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2003-12-04 02:20pm

RedImperator wrote:How much money would be available if we retired the space shuttle and abandoned the ISS (white elephant that it is)? Not enough to pay for the whole thing, but certainly billions of dollars currently going down the toilet.

I dunno, but I like your line of thinking. Get rid of one program to fund another. However we should ask ourselves, would we gain more from a moon program or coming up with a Shuttle replacement. Are manned shuttles needed? Could this program be funded jointly with say the Chinese? Japanese?

Crayz9000 · Post by **Crayz9000** » 2003-12-04 02:34pm

Stravo wrote:Yay give more money to an Agency that has killed Astronauts out of sheer negilgence!!!

Yippe!!!

We could take a hint from the Russians and sell the remaining shuttles to theme parks, or private investors who might want to fix them up and use them themselves

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-12-04 03:09pm

This smells greatly of BS too me. There's nothing to be gained by sending more people to the moon anyway, I wonder how many probes to Mars and other planets could be funded for the cost of a manned moon mission?

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2003-12-04 03:13pm

the only problem with the probes is we've pretty much learned all that we can through unmanned missions as far as other planets go. the only real way i can see us learning anymore would be to go there with a human crew. Though a revolutionary new vehicle would be needed for that. the shuttle just isn't going to cut it anymore. hell, half the shuttle technology is dated anyways.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-12-04 03:32pm

Darth_Zod wrote:the only problem with the probes is we've pretty much learned all that we can through unmanned missions as far as other planets go.

We haven't even landed a probe on every planet yet. What we should be funding is a mission to Pluto, since if one is not launched soon by the time any probe could arrive the atmosphere will be frozen, for the next 200 years. Anyway there is little that humans can do that probes cannot.

the only real way i can see us learning anymore would be to go there with a human crew. Though a revolutionary new vehicle would be needed for that. the shuttle just isn't going to cut it anymore. hell, half the shuttle technology is dated anyways.

The shuttle is simply obsolete and was a stupid wasteful absurdly expensive concept in the first place.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-12-04 03:39pm

This is just another one of Bush's moronic attempts to curry the public favor leading up to election time. First the Iraq visit, now a JFK knock-off. Don't take any of it seriously.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2003-12-04 04:07pm

The Kernel wrote:This is just another one of Bush's moronic attempts to curry the public favor leading up to election time. First the Iraq visit, now a JFK knock-off. Don't take any of it seriously.

I dunno, he's launched two back to back wars in just two years...

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2003-12-04 04:10pm

Stravo wrote:Yay give more money to an Agency that has killed Astronauts out of sheer negilgence!!!

Yippe!!!

The same agency that is terribly underfunded and mismanaged, the same organization that recieves no publicity or credit for it's triumphs, but is ragged left and right for it's errors.

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2003-12-04 04:14pm

MKSheppard wrote:
The Kernel wrote:This is just another one of Bush's moronic attempts to curry the public favor leading up to election time. First the Iraq visit, now a JFK knock-off. Don't take any of it seriously.
I dunno, he's launched two back to back wars in just two years...

Where do you think he`s gonna start his third war?

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-12-04 04:34pm

MKSheppard wrote:
The Kernel wrote:This is just another one of Bush's moronic attempts to curry the public favor leading up to election time. First the Iraq visit, now a JFK knock-off. Don't take any of it seriously.
I dunno, he's launched two back to back wars in just two years...

American voters have VERY short memories. As long as he can wrap up the Iraq thing, or at least keep it on the down low, he will be remembered come November as the caring President who has a dream to build a colony on the moon.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2003-12-04 04:44pm

The Kernel wrote:
MKSheppard wrote:
The Kernel wrote:This is just another one of Bush's moronic attempts to curry the public favor leading up to election time. First the Iraq visit, now a JFK knock-off. Don't take any of it seriously.
I dunno, he's launched two back to back wars in just two years...
American voters have VERY short memories. As long as he can wrap up the Iraq thing, or at least keep it on the down low, he will be remembered come November as the caring President who has a dream to build a colony on the moon.

Or...GASP...we SUPPORTED the wars!

GrandMasterTerwynn · Post by **GrandMasterTerwynn** » 2003-12-04 04:45pm

TrailerParkJawa wrote:
RedImperator wrote:How much money would be available if we retired the space shuttle and abandoned the ISS (white elephant that it is)? Not enough to pay for the whole thing, but certainly billions of dollars currently going down the toilet.
I dunno, but I like your line of thinking. Get rid of one program to fund another. However we should ask ourselves, would we gain more from a moon program or coming up with a Shuttle replacement. Are manned shuttles needed? Could this program be funded jointly with say the Chinese? Japanese?

A Moon program is a worthless waste of time and money, and the only thing that would be gained out of it is that Uncle Sam will be able to wave his dick about in a vaguely masculine fashion. A moonbase would suck up an incredible amount of resources and offer relatively little (worse, it now seems that the original belief that there was ice at the lunar poles is likely wishful thinking.)

Also, a Mars program where we just leave some litter on the Martian surface and take a few rocks home, is worse than worthless. Robotic technology is progressing to the point where humans won't be needed to do a proper survey of the place. The only Mars program that would be worth pursuing is one where we go there, we found a colony, and we terraform the place.

Really, the only bodies that would be worth sending people to are the small Earth-crossing asteroids. They're easy to get to, and each one is an inexpensive space-station-in-a-box.

Unfortunately, to get to that point, we need to entirely scrap the old shuttle program, and concentrate on cheap, ideally recycleable, human transport into space. This would be a far less-expensive goal than any mastubatory manned missions outside of near-Earth space, and it would benefit the Europeans, the Russians, and the Chinese to get in on this program.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-12-04 04:51pm

Nathan F wrote: Or...GASP...we SUPPORTED the wars!

Some did, some didn't. I supported the war in Afghanistan, although not the actions afterwards which has left the country to revert into the world's largest Opium producer once again. I did not support the war in Iraq, but now that it is over and done with I wholeheartedly support the reconstruction and I hope that it succeeds.

Unfortunately, I think many people will vote against Bush not for his genuine mistakes, but because they don't like American soldiers fighting a "losing war" in Iraq while being unable to realize that these things take time. That is the problem with our nation building initiatives: the American people become so impatient that no long-term efforts can be successful.

I really do hope that Clark gets the Deomcratic nomination because he can beat Bush with his appeal to moderates AND he will take the situation in Iraq to its best conclusion over the rest of the Democratic candidates (at least, in my opinion).