Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

President Bush To Call For Return To Moon?

simoniker posted about 11 years ago | from the hup-hup-and-haway dept.

Space 1496

Brian Stretch writes " According to the National Review: 'When President Bush delivers a speech recognizing the centenary of heavier-than-air-powered flight December 17, it is expected that he will proffer a bold vision of renewed space flight, with at its center a return to the moon, perhaps even establishment of a permanent presence there. If he does, it will mean that he has decided the United States should once again become a space-faring nation.' Here's hoping. The article also includes talk of nuclear engines and using the moon as a testbed for going to Mars."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

FIRST POST (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7625432)

oh goody, my fp

I couldn't agree more (5, Interesting)

ChaoticLimbs (597275) | about 11 years ago | (#7625436)

A moon base would be so much better than the ISS.

Re:I couldn't agree more (5, Interesting)

ChaoticLimbs (597275) | about 11 years ago | (#7625460)

Empty space has no materials to build with and nothing to tunnel into. The moon has both. It would be a better platform for construction of hugely expensive wastes of resorces and time than empty space.
If we gotta go to space at all, lets build a city on the fricking moon. Why not, budget's shot to hell anyway.

Re:I couldn't agree more (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7625480)

For more perspective on the significance of American's dalliances with the moon, see: the Penis Size Debate [penissizedebate.com]

Die Bush Die! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7625437)

Bush Sucks!

Thank you China! (4, Interesting)

ericspinder (146776) | about 11 years ago | (#7625441)

Nothing gets America going more than a little competition.

The article says nothing about the method, the cheapest way (just off the top of my head) would be to update the Saturn 5, but (I think) the best solution would be to leverage a Space Station (one in the "right" orbit) and use that as a way station. That way you could reuse a moon obiter lander repeatedly.

Re:Thank you China! (1)

Ty_Webb (729466) | about 11 years ago | (#7625489)

Precisely! We just need that kick-in-the-pants be it Pearl Harbor-style to get us out of the Depression (albeit a very negative kick-in-the-pants), or a Sputnik-like one similar to China's plans. Three cheers for The Space Race Part Duex.

Re:Thank you China! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7625559)

Could I have a Sputnik-like kick-in-the-pants to go, hold the Pearl Harbor-style?

(It seems to me we had a Pearl Harbor-style a couple of years ago, and it still smarts.)

Re:Thank you China! (4, Interesting)

Slack3r78 (596506) | about 11 years ago | (#7625497)

While that's a nice idea, the problem lays in the simple physics of it. It takes an enormous amount of energy to break the earth's gravitational pull, and once you've expended that much energy(read:fuel) you're just as well off coasting the rest of the way to the moon until you get picked up by the moon's gravity, rather than stop along the way.

Re:Thank you China! (1)

shoptroll (544006) | about 11 years ago | (#7625537)

My thoughts exactly...

As soon as we beat the russians the public lost interest in the whole space race... Now that other people are trying to send people there again we want to go back?

Hmmm... Interesting seeing as there hasn't been any mention of the possibility of returning for a long time...

Besides, whatever happened to the Mars missions? Are we gonna scrub those to concentrate on the moon again?

I'm Moving (5, Funny)

php_pheen (717821) | about 11 years ago | (#7625442)

Finally, an opportunity to live somewhere that doesn't suck... not yet anyway...

Re:I'm Moving (4, Funny)

Kneht (218314) | about 11 years ago | (#7625475)

You'll find nothing sucks so hard as a vacuum though.

Re:I'm Moving (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7625510)

You'll find nothing sucks so hard as a vacuum though.

Wrong! That joke, for instance, sucks harder.

Re:I'm Moving (-1, Offtopic)

hdparm (575302) | about 11 years ago | (#7625535)

Yeah. But did you know that if you spell numbers starting from 1 (one), you have to get to one thousand before you encounter first letter a?

Re:I'm Moving (4, Funny)

DarkBlackFox (643814) | about 11 years ago | (#7625501)

It's a partial vacuum. It sucks by default.

Re:I'm Moving (1)

feyhunde (700477) | about 11 years ago | (#7625531)

Actually, since there is nothing there it can't suck. Only when we are exposed to it, we blow.

And thus.... (4, Funny)

bloodrose (87474) | about 11 years ago | (#7625443)

Bush Phones Home

What's the real reason (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7625444)

Must ... cover ... up ... economy problems ... iraq problems ... re-election soon ...

Re:What's the real reason (-1, Offtopic)

jimmy_dean (463322) | about 11 years ago | (#7625492)

Economy is doing just fine thank you...if I recall correctly, I heard on NPR this morning that it's the first time national corporate profits have ever hit a combined total of over a trillion dollars for on quarter. So tell me, why would Bush want to cover up something that has never been achieved before? I guess maybe Bush has a heart...doesn't want to completely make Clinton look like the idiot that he really was by totally blaiming the bad economy on his presidency and we all know it was because of Clinton and his *let's help the poorest people* mentality. What a good laugh.

Re:What's the real reason (2, Insightful)

ergo98 (9391) | about 11 years ago | (#7625532)

it's the first time national corporate profits have ever hit a combined total of over a trillion dollars for on quarter

Look up "inflation". It's the same trick that allows Hollywood to produce a new super biggest-box-office-of-all-time every couple of years.

we all know it was because of Clinton and his *let's help the poorest people* mentality

We do? Funny, but most people I know believe that it was the inevitable crash after a period of irrational exuberance (a bubble), to quote Greenspan. Couple that with the fact that capitalist economies follow almost regular cyclical swings, and the downturn was absolutely inevitable.

Re:What's the real reason (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7625548)

That's a laugh... try searching for 'miserable failure' in google and see what comes up... it ain't Clinton. Go ahead and try it.

Re:What's the real reason (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7625557)

Are those trillion dollars adjusted for inflation?

Re:What's the real reason (1)

Rick the Red (307103) | about 11 years ago | (#7625577)

Economy is doing just fine thank you
Yet I'm still unemployed, thank you. And thank you, too, Mr. Bush (and I use the term "Mr." loosely). Mostly, though, I thank Ralf Naffer and the Supreames.

Re:What's the real reason (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7625494)

huh? The economy is booming. Try getting out of your basement once in a while

Re:What's the real reason (0, Flamebait)

cujo_1111 (627504) | about 11 years ago | (#7625512)

Bush must really think that US citizens are stupid. As the new opposition leader in Australia said "President Bush is the most incompetent and dangerous president yet" or something like that. Not far wrong I think.

Re:What's the real reason (0)

darxyde (607706) | about 11 years ago | (#7625553)

You can read Mark Lathams comments here [news.com.au] .

Actually (5, Funny)

commodoresloat (172735) | about 11 years ago | (#7625551)

He's just figuring we might find WMD there.

Re:What's the real reason (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7625568)

Bush is going for the X-prize...?

Those were there before he was.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7625576)


Wow.. I don't know if I'm happy about this (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7625445)

Earlier this year, the Space Exploration Act of 2003 was introduced into congress. It laid out a long-term, logical, realistic timeline for space exploration in a schedule that called for manufacturing facilities at the lagrange points and establishing permanent research bases on the moon and mars within 20 years. It was designed with an eye to what could best further the understanding and goals of science, and described oversight procedures to ensure that NASA actually kept to its schedule. It was about everything you could ask of a proposed revamping of the space program. The bill got almost no attention in the mainstream press, it was referred to a house subcommittee on 9/16/2003, and that was the last that was heard of it. I don't know if that means it's still alive or not, but either way, it's chances don't look good now.
Maybe I'm just being pessimistic, but I suspect that by the time we actually figure out what this new plan is, it will turn out to be utterly unambitious, re-doing what we've already done (um.. let's go to the moon! yeah!) for the sole sake that we feel like we have to one-up the Chinese. I hope I'm wrong, but this appears it is going to be politics driving science, not the other way around, and I question its usefulness if it is going to be implemented in the same closed and uninclusive manner it's being planned.

I mean, the direction of these plans look like they're being guided directly by NASA. I want to say that's a good thing. But NASA lately has shown a distinct lack of vision. NASA as of late has almost been more about lip service than anything-- being able to say, "Yup! We can get into low earth orbit!" or "We've got a space station!", but then not not actually caring what interesting or forward-looking things we can do as a result. This leads me to worry that if NASA is deciding what we do next, it will be the same sort of lip service-- just going to the moon for the sake of going to the moon, and not exploring what revolutionary or groundbreaking things that we could do in the process.

On the other hand, this looks like it would involve an increase in NASA's budget. I've heard it charged the problem with NASA's lack of ambition of late is not the leadership, but just that they don't have enough money to do anything more than the bare minimum. An increase in funds might mean they would have breathing room to do great things again. And most of NASA's such problems-- the aimless floundering that's characterized the attempts to replace the Shuttle, for example-- have been due to a lack of direction. A clear set of direction and goals, any of them, no matter now small, could once again cause NASA to streamline and orient itself toward getting positive work done. Bush's plan would very likely provide that sort of orientation.

Anyway, I just don't know what to think here. Am I being too pessimistic?

Re:Wow.. I don't know if I'm happy about this (1)

HiThere (15173) | about 11 years ago | (#7625569)

Well, NASA has recently (the last two decades) been operating under a budget that was designed to destroy it, and with administrators that were designed to destroy it -- or at least not protest too vigorously about attempts to destroy from outside. But judging from the fact finding committees reports I think the original statement is more accurate. Possibly if the agency got a new budget and a new set of administrators it could recover. Perhaps.

I thought we couldn't stay on the moon (2, Interesting)

AndreyF (701606) | about 11 years ago | (#7625446)

There will never be a permanent settlement on the moon. It's pretty well known by now that there is not enough water there to sustain any kind of colony of any sort (that ice cap turned out to be way too thin).

Re:I thought we couldn't stay on the moon (1)

irc.goatse.cx troll (593289) | about 11 years ago | (#7625467)

Bring our own water in decent quantaties and we can stay for a long enough time, especially when recycling it (thats non-gross speak for convering urine back into water).

That gives me an idea (1)

ObviousGuy (578567) | about 11 years ago | (#7625544)

Recycled bottled water.

No waste at all. Save the environment while quenching your thirst.

not just for drinking (1)

AndreyF (701606) | about 11 years ago | (#7625558)

water would be required not only for drinking, but for many fundemental functions of a colony (we would need to bring a lot of water).

back in march [nature.com] they thought there was lots of water on the moon, but new data [bbc.co.uk] shows that this is very unlikely.

Re:I thought we couldn't stay on the moon (1, Interesting)

bluethundr (562578) | about 11 years ago | (#7625567)

There will never be a permanent settlement on the moon. It's pretty well known by now that there is not enough water there to sustain any kind of colony of any sort (that ice cap turned out to be way too thin).

Scientific advances always have their naysayers. People who say "Sorry! Can't do that 'cause... x". Given the above statement it's reasonable to assume you would've told the Wright brothers "Heavier than air flight? No way!" had you been alive during those times.

Well, to establish a permanent moon base, they'll have to do things a little like the way they did on the USS Enterprise [barnesandnoble.com] . They will have to recycle [go.com] .

A small step for mankind...... (-1, Flamebait)

venom600 (527627) | about 11 years ago | (#7625447)

....and a large step for W-kind!!

(in my best 'George W' voice)

Re:A small step for mankind...... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7625470)

YAY! Republicans have finally left that stodgy old '50s stereotype and stepped into the 60s!

hoax or no? (0, Troll)

potpie (706881) | about 11 years ago | (#7625449)

So are we really going there this time? ;)

Aerospace Engineer (1)

forlornhope (688722) | about 11 years ago | (#7625454)

As an Aerospace Engineering major at WVU let me be the first to say, YIPPIE!!!! That is all. We now return you to your regularly scheduled trolls.

The possible reasons why: (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7625459)

1. There are weapons of mass destruction on the moon.
2. Saddam or Osama, or both, may be hiding in a moon crater.
3. The moon is made of oil.
4. Don't want those pinko commie Chinese taking over our moon.
5. Because the Mooninites are really funny and he wants to meet them.

Re:The possible reasons why: (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7625508)

I hear he's going to liberate the moon from Earth's orbit.

Free the moon now!

I nominate Bush to be on first flight to the moon (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7625464)

We always knew Bush was looney... now he's just plain lunar.

Opiate of the masses (4, Insightful)

Sneftel (15416) | about 11 years ago | (#7625465)

Oh jesus. And how about some bread and circuses? [theonion.com]

Money? (4, Insightful)

Squideye (37826) | about 11 years ago | (#7625466)

Bush's government doesn't have the money to pay for his military enterprises.

It lacks the money to provide for basic infrastructure.

At a time when commercial space flight is being touted as the most logical course, Bush is now saying that he wants to send people back to the moon?

I'm all for the new frontier. It would be great if people were inspired about space again. But Bush does not deserve to be the one to get us there. He couldn't even manage the Houston Astros.

Re:Money? (1)

bersl2 (689221) | about 11 years ago | (#7625571)

He couldn't even manage the Houston Astros.

He was a part owner of the Texas Rangers, not the Astros.

He also wanted to become the commissioner of MLB, had he not become (I think) governor of Texas.

Re:Money? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7625575)

Eh? We lack the money to pay for basic infrastructure? Slashdotters are so dumb apparently they have to make stuff up now.


I like science and all, but... (5, Insightful)

rolocroz (625853) | about 11 years ago | (#7625468)

...is now really the right time to be doing this? There's a lot going on in the US right now (Iraq war, etc.) in the middle of a recession, and going to the moon just doesn't seem like the greatest idea for us right now.

Here's a first. (2)

theparanoidcynic (705438) | about 11 years ago | (#7625469)

If Dubby does push for us to get serious about space travel again it would be the fist time I ever agreed with him on something. :p

$500 Billion in debt. (5, Insightful)

khasim (1285) | about 11 years ago | (#7625471)

Do we have the money to fund this?

We need to do it but I don't know if we can afford it.

Re:$500 Billion in debt. (1)

theparanoidcynic (705438) | about 11 years ago | (#7625502)

We could afford things if we didn't try to fund programs with tax cuts and didn't go on absurd millitary adventures . . . . . .

Re:$500 Billion in debt. (0, Offtopic)

jimmy_dean (463322) | about 11 years ago | (#7625555)

What, so you like being taxed? Do you honestly like giving the government 40% of your paycheck...your hard earned money? Since when is giving back to the citizens such a bad thing? And look what it's done - it's given the economy a chance to rejuvinate - to get back on it's legs. And that's exactly what's happened. If you're so ungreatful, go live in a country that like s taxing it's people like most countries in Europe. I for one like living in a republic, and not a social democracy.

Re:$500 Billion in debt. (1)

Bootsy Collins (549938) | about 11 years ago | (#7625539)

Do we have the money to fund this?

Of course not.

We need to do it but I don't know if we can afford it.

We need to do it at some point. Do we need to do it right now? Of course not.

$500 Billion in debt. (2, Insightful)

monadicIO (602882) | about 11 years ago | (#7625570)

why do we *need* to do it, at least at this point in time? Would we necessarily learn more about the moon , or anything else than we already do?

I understand getting the space shuttle program back on track, because tonnes of experiments carried out in zero (or near zero) gravity has substantial implications for us here on earth. Perhaps the first landing on moon was a test of technology (and the "human spirit" bullshit), but what good is it going to do to go to the moon again? It's not ever going to support life, nor
is there any real chance of "mining" the moon once we've wasted all resources here on earth.

In other news... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7625472)

Clinton calls for a trip to Uranus.

Re:In other news... (1)

Olmy's Jart (156233) | about 11 years ago | (#7625543)

Booo hisss... Old joke...

Badda bimm...

That joke predates Clinton so you can't attribute it to him, even... My God! I heard that as a child (and I'm in my 50's). Benny Godman could have told that joke... (Ok... Anyone in this crowd even know who he WAS?)

Running Dogs of Capitalist Imperialism (0, Redundant)

RealProgrammer (723725) | about 11 years ago | (#7625473)

All your base are belong to us.

Weird (1)

AaronStJ (182845) | about 11 years ago | (#7625474)

Huh. Looks like we geeks may get what we want. And president Bush will be the one giving it to us. Odd.

Re:Weird (1, Insightful)

Saganaga (167162) | about 11 years ago | (#7625550)

I'm a geek, and I agree with almost everything President Bush has done. So what is so odd, you insensitive clod?

Sadly impractical at this point (3, Insightful)

Slack3r78 (596506) | about 11 years ago | (#7625476)

While I love the idea and think it'd be a great thing to do, I feel that it'd also be pretty much financially impossible to make happen as things stand right now. Going to the moon would cost billions upon billions of dollars when the government's already running a half-trillion dollars a year in the hole. This time, there isn't the pressing urge for dominance and brass-balls bragging rights that there was during the peak of the cold war, and without such a rivalry, I doubt the motivation exists within government to find funding for a project this massive in scope.

Baby Steps (5, Insightful)

The Snowman (116231) | about 11 years ago | (#7625479)

Going to Mars seems to be a popular idea. Before we try establishing a permanent base on Mars, even unmanned, I think we need to prove ourselves by going back to the moon AND staying there. I.e., establish a moon base, even a small one.

Obviously the moon is much closer. More importantly, we don't need to worry about the synchronization of our orbits. The moon is always roughly the same distance away from us no matter what day of the year it is. This makes it a much easier target to hit than Mars no matter what time it is.

Re:Baby Steps (2, Funny)

Jardine (398197) | about 11 years ago | (#7625549)

Not to mention that the moon people seem a lot less hostile than the martians. Damn martians keep shooting down our probes.

Next man on the moon (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7625481)

My vote is to stick 'Dubya' into a spacecraft and fire it off toward the moon. If it hits, great... if not... who cares? Either way it's one less f***ing moron here on planet earth.

Where are the Slashdot k00ks? (2, Troll)

Rotten168 (104565) | about 11 years ago | (#7625483)

You know, the tinfoil hatters who will now claim that we never landed on the moon and this is an attempt by Bush to steal the next election and distract us from Iraq.

Re:Where are the Slashdot k00ks? (1)

rolocroz (625853) | about 11 years ago | (#7625530)

They all got debunked [badastronomy.com] .

Re:Where are the Slashdot k00ks? (1)

Oriumpor (446718) | about 11 years ago | (#7625578)

It was physically impossible for the apollo rockets to even leave the eliptical that to believe that it could reach the moon is preposterous.


Whew, now that that's over with. I don't quite see how any attempt to get human beings back to the moon could be lauded by anyone. The moon is a nearly limitless basestation for solar energy. The lefties will be confronted with: This is a limitless source of energy. and the Righties: this is a bountiful opportunity ripe for the picking.

Arthur C. Clarke is da man... (1)

crazyfreakid (725264) | about 11 years ago | (#7625484)

On to Europa!

A Step In The Right Direction. . . (3, Insightful)

MikeDawg (721537) | about 11 years ago | (#7625485)

IF Bush makes this statement during his speech, I will be completely in shock. As much as I dislike Bush, I think the United States definetely needs to reestablish a space presense, and on the moon, that would be great. The ISS is turning up to be more hype than anything else, anything more established.

By creating a real, strong, presence on the moon, we would research and develop much more technology, at a more distinguishable rate, and the rewards would be plentiful enough based on the technology that develops from increased space expenditure. Even if the moon is completely dead, and there are no resources, and no valuable information for us to gather on it, I think we would still come out ahead in this situation.

Re:A Step In The Right Direction. . . (1)

crazyfreakid (725264) | about 11 years ago | (#7625536)

You're right, I've been kind of wondering what the next big thing would be... Hubble is on the way out, ISS is just a pretty face... Here's hoping Bush (as much as I hate the guy) can pull this off, which will be a little tough, unless you wanna privatize the public school system.

oh great (1)

Oriumpor (446718) | about 11 years ago | (#7625488)

So they're gonna put nuclear engines on the moon and send it to mars. I mean... wait... I should prolly RTFA.... (ten minutes later)

uhh... I still can't tell if dubya wants to send the moon to mars or not.

But still,
(Others in Congress have argued that the space shuttle should remain on the ground permanently.)

Is a real reflection of how much our society values space exploration anymore.

Re:oh great (1)

crazyfreakid (725264) | about 11 years ago | (#7625560)

Congress arguing that the space shuttles should be permanently grounded isn't due to us putting a low value on space exploration, it's due to us putting a high value on the people we send up there, not to mention the expensive equipment.


cmdr_shithead (527909) | about 11 years ago | (#7625493)

Kick the racist colonist white exploiters out of Palestine, send them to the Moon or to Brooklyn!

Where are we getting the money for this again? (1)

generationxyu (630468) | about 11 years ago | (#7625495)

Cause, last I checked we didn't exactly have a surplus.

Mars society.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7625496)

The Mars Society [marssociety.org] won't be happy...

Yup, Bush calls for return to moon! (5, Funny)

Kirk Troll (729217) | about 11 years ago | (#7625499)

That's the best idea I've ever heard! Lets rocket Bush to the Moon! ;)

Oh no! (2, Funny)

Call Me Black Cloud (616282) | about 11 years ago | (#7625506)

Coincidentally, I just rented a couple of the Space 1999 DVDs from Netflix and all I can say is this is a bad idea. Magnetic fields will hurt the lunarnauts' brains and make them attack the other colonists!

And need I mention the Terrible Space Secret [somethingawful.com] ? I think not...

I will say Space 1999 had the coolest looking ships of any series. They actually seemed to be well designed and functional.

Er ... (1)

B3ryllium (571199) | about 11 years ago | (#7625511)

I always thought he might be a bit looney, but this would sinch it.

I'm VERY curious to see what the next election will bring.

Someone claiming to be a time traveler once suggested that in 2004/2005, America would be hit with a civil war ... every day that goes by, it looks more and more like he might be right :)

because it's there (1)

larry bagina (561269) | about 11 years ago | (#7625513)

A proposal in a speech doesn't mean much. The last State of the Union address talked about funding for hydrogen cars on par with the Manhatten project. Maybe if hydrogen cars would track down evildoers and smoke them out.... but I digress.

The moon was an appealing target in the 1960s to show the USSR did not have superiority. No offense to other countries, but we just don't have that challenge anymore. Today's enemies are camel-fuckers living in tents in some 3rd world country.

It's About Time! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7625514)

Finally someone is beginning to realize that the American technological structure has gone to hell and we need something to revitalize it. We reached a zenith of advancement 30 years ago and have been hiding from the stars ever since...

And for those saying that "it costs too much money", consider this...

for every $1 that the US spent on the Apollo program, $23 went BACK into the economy. This (if done right) will do far more than any phoney tax cuts ever will.

Like Mars? (4, Interesting)

skydude_20 (307538) | about 11 years ago | (#7625515)

Didn't Slashdot say [slashdot.org] Bush was going to announce Project Prometheus(go to Mars) in his last State of the Union? I think I'll just wait and see what he actually says in his speach before I get too excited.

Re:Like Mars? (1)

samurairas (666175) | about 11 years ago | (#7625552)

It's cool, Project Prometheus is in a secure, undisclosed location.

Agreed! (2, Funny)

ath0mic (519762) | about 11 years ago | (#7625517)

It is time to liberate the people of the moon!

Never trust this guy... (0, Offtopic)

mikeg22 (601691) | about 11 years ago | (#7625519)

After the "Clear Sky Initiative" (reducing emmission limits on some of our heaviest polluters), changes to the "Clean Water Act" (reducing environmental protections on 1/5 of nations water sources), and the "Healthy Forests Initiative" (boils down to allowing logging in protected areas), I wouldn't be surprised if "Going back to the Moon" meant "Nuking the Moon and using the bits and pieces to build parking lots in Yellowstone."

makes sense (0)

Lord_Dweomer (648696) | about 11 years ago | (#7625520)

Well, this makes perfect sense. The Chinese are striving for the moon, so Bush just wants to get back there...setup a nice base....and um.....prepare things so we have an easy time "liberating" them once they land there.

Well, Duh! (2, Interesting)

Rick the Red (307103) | about 11 years ago | (#7625521)

using the moon as a testbed for going to Mars.
Geeze, if we can't establish a base on the Moon, how do they think we can do it on Mars? Since a Mars mission will be several months long I thought it was a no-brainer that we'd first need to prove we can stay on the Moon for more than a few days.

With What Money? (5, Insightful)

jIyajbe (662197) | about 11 years ago | (#7625523)

Bush has done everything he can to give the U.S. a massive $6E12 deficit, and now he calls for this?

He knows there is no way the congress can, or would, appropriate the money for this, given the deficit, so he's just blowin' smoke for PR (read: election) purposes.

Sorry, George. Ain't fooled.

Can he even spell "space"? (2, Insightful)

samurairas (666175) | about 11 years ago | (#7625524)

I love the idea of expanding space exploration, and it has a good chance of bi-partisan support, but with the already grossly engorged nation budget, how in the hell are we going to fund something like this? Just plunge deeper into debt? Furthermore, I haven't seen much to address the management issues at NASA being done...this could wind up going very, very wrong.

...in other news (0, Troll)

Nostrada (208820) | about 11 years ago | (#7625525)

Bush will also announce further tax cuts for the rich in order to finance the journey to the moon.

Hey, it worked for the invasion of Iraq!

second term (2, Insightful)

ruprechtjones (545762) | about 11 years ago | (#7625529)

hmm. smells like re-election politics to me. "keep me in office, and I will return us to the moon within my second regime... er, term as your president..."

Millions of slashdotters heads explode... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7625533)

torn between their opinions that bush is the anti christ and their hope for some moon babes...

First Iraq, now the Moon (2, Interesting)

roman_mir (125474) | about 11 years ago | (#7625534)

Bush sure has his priorities straight - conquer the world, first Iraq, then the Moon and then maybe even Cuba. But seriously - can the States afford anything right now that has nothing to do with their social programs? I normally would never question the necessity for the space programs etc., I am all for the further development of science and progress of humans into the space, but I don't see how US can pay for this right now, whith the kind of spendings they have in Iraq....

One thing for sure: if there is any life on the Moon, they better pray that there is no oil there, or they will have to be 'liberated'.

Promises trustworthy? (5, Interesting)

HiThere (15173) | about 11 years ago | (#7625538)

When I look at his record for the promises he made about things I was in favor of... I'll believe him after he delivers. Even then I'll check to make sure he didn't sabotage the project, so that it will fold immediately after he leaves office.

OTOH, Texas has this big space center, so this might be a way to spread some cash around back home. So it's possible he doesn't have any motives other than the obvious ones. O, and he has this brother who's governor of Florida. They might be in for a cash infusion too. OK. He has "legitimate" reasons. But the first paragraph stands. (He's so far welched on most of the promises that I thought important.)

Say one thing and... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7625540)

". . . it is expected that he will proffer a bold vision of renewed space flight, with at its center a return to the moon. . . "

Which like his other "visions" that he has shared with us in his speaches, will be immediately followed by him lobbying his friends in Congress into cutting NASA's funding by about half. And like the other times this has happened, there will be next to no coverage of this second phase. He will be hailed as a brave and progressive leader in the world of scientific exploration, even while NASA crubles into a publically funded low cost research lab for corporations that find thier research facilities in India and China inadiquate.


blackgasmask (631716) | about 11 years ago | (#7625541)

Enron thinks there is oil to be found under the lunar crust...and its exploration is paid for by YOU!!

Reacting as usual (1)

Bugmaster (227959) | about 11 years ago | (#7625542)

Once again, America is following someone else's lead into space. I think it's an unfortunate artifact of our political system that no major scientific project can be planned more than 4 years ahead -- because the next president will start by cutting costs, and the first things to cut are always the nonessential niceties, like space travel and medicare. Only a major embarassment, such as a Communist nation (Russia in the past, China currently) waving at us from orbit, can prod America into doing something entirely new and daring. Well, I guess it's better than nothing...

President Bush (-1, Flamebait)

MisterFancypants (615129) | about 11 years ago | (#7625545)

President Bush is a huge fag.

Saturn V does is no more, what rocket to use? (1)

MrJones (4691) | about 11 years ago | (#7625546)

Did you know that the blue print of Saturn V rocket where destroyed before the Shuttle progeam started?
So, what rocket can be used instead?
Atlas 4? Delta 4? Who knows!

Moon Supremacy (1)

afternoon (310303) | about 11 years ago | (#7625547)

Well, if you want to convince the world that you really are the superior force, an all-American vantage point in the (short-range) heavens says supremacy like nothing else. Not even invasion.

Returning to the moon in whatever form and for whatever reason fits the neocon/PNAC goals very well.

But I too hope that some good will come out of it and not just a single-minded, politicised NASA.

How about... (1, Funny)

Fear the Clam (230933) | about 11 years ago | (#7625554)

America proposes to send just Bush to the Moon? I'm sure such a proposal would do much to re-establish cooperation with other countries.

George Bush and the moon? Great Idea! (1)

Robotron2084 (262343) | about 11 years ago | (#7625565)

He could be the first presidential astronaut!

Maybe we can get him to stay there and leave us alone...

"And that's one small step for us folks, and... hey guys, where are you going? Wait! What about my tortillaaaaaaaas!!!!"
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?