New Mars Forums

[color=#000000:post_uid0]Eisenhower in true Republican fashion concentrated on the military aspect of space (just as even the interstate highway project was given a military justification so as to sell it to the knee-jerk "limited government" types. Thus the Vanguard rocket even had a military name (later known as Flopnik).

"Interestingly, despite his problems with the Sputniks, Eisenhower remained cold to reaping the prestige benefits of a Moon shot. The meeting minutes state that Eisenhower was "firmly of the opinion that the rule of reason had to be applied to these Space projects—that we couldn't pour unlimited funds into these costly projects where there was nothing of early value to the Nation's security. . . . [I]n the present situation, the President mused, he would rather have a good Redstone than be able to hit the moon, for we didn't have any enemies on the moon!"

I was a hard sell, but Senate Democrats like Johnson & McCormack prevailed.

Even in the early 60s, the goal was eventual cooperation with the USSR in space.

Would a man have ever been sent to the moon with the military running the show? Doubtful!

Just as a "Star Wars" component (favorite plaything of the Republican military-industrial compex) will prevent a manned Mars mission from ever flying. What's needed is an effort annpunced where adventure and exploration are the ultimate criteria (as JFK did).

It's axiomatic that there will be no commercial exploitation of Mars for a long time. What possible business model exists even on paper? IMAX films? In lieu of that, it must be a government funded effort as practically all exploration to extreme environments has been in history.[/color:post_uid0]