Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Should U.S. attempt manned missions to the Moon? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (5)	1/10/2004 12:07:33 AM
From: Edscharp	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 41

I too wonder where the funds will come from. That's my main problem with this proposal. I honestly don't see how this initiative can be usurped into a Star Wars program. If we begin spending billions of dollars to go to the moon at some point the people will actually expect us to go there. The moon is too far away to be of any practical purpose in a space defense. I suppose it's always possible that some new technology may be invented, maybe a more efficient propulsion system..or something like it, that could be adapted to a star wars program. But, beyond a few incidental technology advancements that might be adapted to military use there is no way the administration could reallocate funds for a peaceful space program into a star wars program without the consent of Congress. The President does not have the power to reallocate budgets approved by Congress. I do think there is something to your suggestion that the Chinese space program has prompted the administration to advocate a moon program. Ever since Sputnik there has been an innate fear by many Americans that other countries, especially those that aren't our allies, might get a technological edge on us and I do think this mentality may still be behind this administration's proposal. In fact, this is an argument that shouldn't be taken lightly. However, with that being said, I think the best parallel to this particular situation likens back to the days when Britain and France were developing the Concorde, the first Super Sonic Transport (SST) air liner. I remember that there was quite a bit of emotion in this country that the U.S. should make it's own SST to keep up with the British/France effort. And indeed, a prototype American SST was built with the U.S. footing 70% of the bill. The project was finally for a dropped for a number of reasons not the least of which was the enormous expense of the airplane. You can read a quick history of the American SST at the below link. geocities.com Of course the Concorde never made money for Britain or France. Although it may have garnered some prestige for those two countries it cost them dearly financially and just recently; due primarily to economic reasons, the Concorde flights have been permanently discontinued. In retrospect it was a good idea to kill the American SST. Not all technology is good all the time. Financial, political and social forces need to be considered to determine if a major expenditure of this kind is to the advancement or detriment of the people footing the bill. In foresight, I would argue that it is a good idea to kill the new Moon project. It is a money loser with little to gain. As for the Chinese, if they want to waste their money going to the moon I say let them. Now, if Bush proposes an international program to go to the moon I might seriously reconsider this. At least much of the expenses would be defrayed and I can at least see the possibility of some good coming out of a close working relationship with these nations.