Slashdot Mirror
NASA Asteroid Capture Mission To Be Proposed In 2014 Budget
MarkWhittington writes "Included in President Obama's 2014 budget request will be a $100 million line item for NASA for a mission to capture and bring an asteroid to a high orbit around the moon where it will be explored by astronauts. Whether the $2.6 billion mission is a replacement or a supplement to the president's planned human mission to an asteroid is unclear. The proposal was first developed by the Keck Institite in April, 2012 and has achieved new impetus due to the meteor incident over Russia and new fears of killer asteroids."
But why should we spend money on an asteroid capture mission when there are still banks that need fountains in their lobbies? Priorities, people!
A measly Trillion dollars for removing Saddam, fighting and defeating Al Qaeda branches in Iraq and Afghanistan, kicking out the Pakistani puppet Taliban, installing some loss-hostile regimes, scaring Gaddafi into giving up his WMD, killing bin Laden himself, and *best of all* turning much of the Muslim world from cheering 9/11 into realising that jihadis are also as hazardous for their health as ours. Then there was employment for a million US servicemen for over a decade. Then there was the huge technology spin offs that keep US companies in the forefront of innovation and keep talented US citizens employed.
These days the US will spend a little less on defense but has reduced influence because of its increasingly introspective geopolitical strategy (set by the politicians, not the military). Rather than supporting allows it sells them out (eg. Poland and Romainia on missile defence), and arms jihadis hoping to curry influence (Libya, Syria), refuses to listen to please for liberty (Iran 2009), and sells out its own values (apologizing shamefully in Cairo in 2009; Hiliary Clinton disgracefully working against the 1st Amendment rights of US citizens in UN HRC Resolution 18/18).
The Trillion dollars on wars that made not only the US but the whole world safer (imagine the chaos of the world at the moment if the jihadis had not been drawn and destroyed to the honeypot in Iraq - and don't be fooled by pop analysis, Iraq created far fewer jihadis than it destroyed).
Instead, the new leftist Administration is planning to spend 60 trillion in unfunded entitlements. Please see *the numerical facts*
http://www.justfacts.com/nationaldebt.asp
So for those around the world who believe the lie that the US is bankrupting itself because of the wars it waged I would like you to examine the *figures* closely. The US military is not the source of the problem. The source of the problem are social programmes. These are large bribes made by politicians to get votes. Mostly made by the Democratic Party. The transfer of wealth from the productive sector of the US economy to the non-productive is what allows for wealth distribution and social programmes. So of this is necessary. However, the promises made far exceed the ability of those in the US who work and pay taxes (government employment is a non-contributor to this, sorry). This is what some Republicans and all Libertarians have been saying for years. Some think the conservatives are against social programmes because they are "mean, greedy old white men". No, the truth is the conservatives are numbers based (rather than primarily ideologically based like progressives/Democrats). That means the conservatives have been trying to stave off that bankruptcy. The Obama Administration has been accelerating spending far beyond what was needed for the bailout of the great recession. From a conservative point of view it looks like Obama is trying to crash the economy so that the US can be made in the image he wants (no surprise if you know who Obama's Marxist political mentors were).
So, the whole "expensive wars" and "cut the military and increase social programmes" is a diversion to keep those who are not numerically and fact focussed occupied. Please also note that while defense spending and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are massive in absolute terms, they are among the cheapest wars the US had ever fought in relative terms. This is because the US free-market economy had grown so much faster than defence spending that it made it cheap for the US to wage wars that other countries simply could not afford. You see, that is the secret to power (which China has learned). Focus less on redistribution of wealth and more on creating it for everyone (with sensible and adequate regulation and protections from exploitation, of course). As (Democratic) President Kennedy once stated in his speech, "A rising tide lifts all boats" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_rising_tide_lifts_all_boats). To bad