Slashdot Mirror


Vice President Pence Vows US Astronauts Will Return To the Moon (engadget.com)

Before astronauts go to Mars, they will return to the Moon, Vice President Mike Pence said in a Wall Street Journal op-ed yesterday and in a speech at the National Air and Space Museum today. He touts "humans exploration and discovery" as the new focus of America's space program. This "means establishing a renewed American presence on the moon, a vital strategic goal. And from the foundation of the moon, America will be the first nation to bring mankind to Mars." Engadget reports: There have been two prevailing (and opposing) views when it comes to U.S. endeavors in human spaceflight. One camp maintains that returning to the moon is a mistake. NASA has already been there; it should work hard and set our sights on Mars and beyond. The other feels that Mars is too much of a reach, and that the moon will be easier to achieve in a short time frame. Mars may be a medium-to-long-term goal, but NASA should use the moon as a jumping-off point. It's not surprising that the Trump administration is valuing short-term gains over a longer, more ambitious project. The U.S. will get to Mars eventually, according to Pence, but the moon is where the current focus lies.

7 of 226 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Good Luck by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It'll probably take a bit more time than you kids have in office.

    That is the whole point. Every president likes to make promises that don't come due till long after they have left office.

    Unless the Trump administration is seeking increased NASA funding for this fiscal year, you can just ignore anything they say about space.

  2. Re:I agree - moon first by Rei · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As far as long term goals go, I wish that Venus would be put on equal footing with Mars. It really is an excellent, and far too neglected, destination.

    --
    "If there was an antonym to 'Elon Musk', it would be 'Richard Branson'."
  3. Total pandering... by Timothy2.0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If this is to be the new focus of NASA, how about shoveling the money they need their way?

  4. Re:Actually I think Trump wants to go... by Kjella · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... anywhere Obama didn't want to (and vice versa). If Obama was for it then Trump (or perhaps more precisely his supporters) are against it. It doesn't matter if it is right or wrong, they have PRE-judged the situation. Why? Because, and I'll be frank, they're racists or to use a softer word, bigots and PREjudice is what you'll get from them.

    That "and vice versa" part became an anti-Trump rant pretty quick. My impression is that the way US politics works neither side can concede that the other side was right. Either an issue is born bi-parisan or it becomes a Democrat/Republican thing that the other side must reject and treat with disdain. At best they might fumble the ball like when Trump tried to abolish Obamacare but under no circumstances could the Republicans admit that that they'd rather it stays. It still has to be some kind of terrible solution that only lives because we couldn't agree on how to throw it out. You don't see Democrats saying "that was a great Republican idea, let's keep working on that" very often either.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  5. Re:Actually I think Trump wants to go... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's funny you say Democrats don't often say Republicans have good ideas. Obamacare was originally a Republican proposal. The Republicans are falling over themselves to kill a healthare bill they created only because the Democrats were the ones to pass it.

  6. Unnecessary politicization. by sabbede · · Score: 5, Insightful
    This sentence was extraneous and does nothing but express the author's political leanings. "It's not surprising that the Trump administration is valuing short-term gains over a longer, more ambitious project."

    It wasn't connected to anything else in the article, just a bit of personal politics slipped in where it didn't belong. The editor should have stripped it out and explained the difference between journalistic and OpEd authorship.

  7. Re:Good Luck by taiwanjohn · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Unless the Trump administration is seeking increased NASA funding for this fiscal year, you can just ignore anything they say about space.

    Normally I'd agree, but in this case I'm cautiously optimistic, if only because VP Pence seems to be a genuine NASA fanboi... he was nine years old for Apollo 11, and asked for a seat on the space sub-committee when he was elected to Congress. Pence was apparently the driving force behind Trump's decision to reconstitute the National Space Council which met yesterday for the first time.

    Given the amount of disruptive innovation in the space industry lately (led by but not limited to SpaceX), now is a particularly opportune time to "innovate" on the policy side as well. Will the new NSC ever amount to anything more than a few high-profile meetings? Hard to say... As you rightly point out: No bucks, no Buck Rogers. But when a handful of billionaires like Musk, Bezos, and Bigelow are investing their own cash to bring new capabilities to the market, you really couldn't ask for a better time for government to get on the bandwagon too.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, you're not using enough of it. --AC