The Future of NASA

fishbonez writes "According to this article, the President's new space exploration initiative parallels his military strategy for space. The article doesn't directly say that NASA will become an integral part of the military plan but clearly that conclusion could be drawn without the need for a tinfoil hat. We have already seen that Hubble will be allowed to expire prematurely as a result of this new initiative. Is the re-allocation of funds within NASA really for getting to the Moon and Mars? Or is it just a cover for shifting toward military space applications? If true, how badly will NASA's scientific mission be effected if it becomes a conduit for giving research and development money to defense contractors?" UPI has a lengthy piece covering the development of the new space plan.

Comments

Re:We have to worry then...

[quetzalc0atl]

yeah, well the space shuttle was originally designed as a nuclear bomber so it cant be all that bad, can it?

Re:NASA is dying... Bushcraft Confirms

[Anonymous Coward]

Needs
Another
Seven
Astronauts

Re:No, we don't!

[Anonymous Coward]

A communist-nazi would be quite a thing to see, seeing as how the ideaologies are opposing. It's like calling someone a bolsevik-capitalist, or a capitalist-nazi.

You fucking pinko commie-industrialist!

You fucking heterosexual homosexual!

You fucking jew christian!

Get it? If you're going to insult someone, at least get it straight in your own mind first. It makes it much more effective instead of people just laughing at your moronic seven year old small dick-a-thon. :~)

Re:NASA is dying... Bushcraft Confirms

[Qrlx]

why do nasa engineers drink sprite?
because they can't get seven up.

I haven't heard any Columbia jokes. Anyone? Maybe the shuttle blowing up is only funny the first time.

Going to the moon today

[Likes Microsoft]

I was walking my dog this morning, and the sight of our moon nearly at the new phase got me pondering the task of flying there, given that this year will mark the 35th anniversary of the first landing. I have a couple of questions for my fellow /.ers:

1. Were the earlier manned moon missions all done at full or nearly full phase?
2. If we were to send a mission there within the year, how would the technology used (specifically, rockets and landers) differ from that of the Apollo program?

Re:World government?

[Mr. Slippery]

I would fear for us all if we ever attempted "world government". As a race, we're not even qualified to run a government, never mind a national one, never mind a global one.

Like all other levels of government, world government is unavoidable. Either one is organized, or a de facto arrangement of rule by the strongest prevails.

Imagine what would happen if your city or town was suddenly and magically cut off from the rest of the world, and all traces of existing government vanished. Would you remain without government? Heck no. Anarchy is unstable. Either you'd all get together and vote some person or group into authority, or the strongest, toughest, meanest SOB around would take charge, or some combination thereof (SOB in charge with an selected/elected body providing some moderation.)

Universal Enlightenment is a prerequisite to abolition of the State, after which the State will inevitably vanish. Or - that failing - nobody will give a damn. But until we're all enlightened, government is inevitable.

Same applies to world government. The strongest, toughest, meanest SOB around has taken charge. The world government exists, and it is the United States. The U.N. just provides a little moderation.