US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

Tom Kalbfus · 2015-07-28 06:39:36

Perhaps a President Trump might fix this:

The Trump Space Hotel and Casino!

th?id=JN.%2f5w%2bpyNsUMpqmXf0r0OCZg&pid=15.1
Imagine a space hotel which looked like this! How much would it cost?

Last edited by Tom Kalbfus (2015-07-28 08:31:23)

Tom Kalbfus · 2015-09-12 22:48:59

I wonder if the public had to choose between a human Mars mission or just divide the amount that would have been spent on giving all the government employees a pay raise, what would they choose?

Would they want to spend $150 billion on Mars or on Iran?

How about a Mars Mission or extra food stamps, which would the public prefer?

SpaceNut · 2015-09-13 07:20:44

public poll on space money expendature as you put it depends on the wording of the question....as well as when
"Public Opinion Polls and Perceptions of US Human Spaceflight"

Americans keen on space exploration, less so on paying for it

A Harris survey taken in 1970 – less than a year after the first moon landing – showed that a majority (56%) thought the landing was not worth the money spent.
Charles “Pete” Conrad Jr. stands with U.S. flag on the lunar surface during the Apollo 12 mission, in 1969
A separate Harris poll, in 1971, however, found that 81% of Americans agreed with the statement that “nothing can equal seeing the astronauts land and walk on the moon as it happened live on TV.”

martienne · 2015-10-12 09:12:38

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

Imagine a space hotel which looked like this! How much would it cost?

Why go to space to stay at the Mariott.....
Plus, in order for it to look like that, it woud need artificial gravity!

As for lack of motivation and passion for Mars among Americans... Yes - because I Americans dreams are more about getting rich! People in Russia love space, there is still a big excitement about it that I think is less prevalent in the US. I think there is a good chance that Russia gets back in the game. (Whether it can achieve results is another story! )

My outlook on the future of the US is negative. I think that country is going down the drain and that it won't be able to finance or commit to a project of the magnitude of going to Mars.

My guess of who goes to Mars, is an ambitious coalition of "newer" players on the political arena who want to prove something to their own citizens and the world. I.e.

—China
—Iran (loves to show off technical skills and has potential to get very rich due to oil)
—Australia
—EU (if it survives the current crisis)
—Possibly Russia (once it's out of the current pinch and reasonably on top of domestic problems)
—Possibly various Asian tiger countries contributers.

I think the US lacks the vision or cohesiveness to pull it off. The US is driven by large corporation and an interest in quick profits. Mars isn't amenable to that. It would initially simply be about science, human curioosity and prestige.

I don't think anything of interest for Mars will come out of the Middle East, Latin America or Africa.

Another thing that speaks against the US are the frequent leadership changes.

Ambitious projects needs more stability and ideology to complete, than the US environment offers.

China's government is stable - they could commit to something long term and see it through.
Russia too, although Lord knows what will happen when Putin retires in the 2020s. Stability probably depends on whether a new strong leader will emerge on the scene.

Possibly nothing can happen at all, as there won't be enough space capable countries that are prepared to work with each other.

Perhaps corporations will play a larger role than space in the future, and someone like Google will become to first to go to space!

Last edited by martienne (2015-10-12 09:20:44)

Void · 2015-10-12 10:45:11

You can look at a map of the globe of the Earth, and see patterns.
In todays world, most space activity is with Asia. Little or none with the other parts of the world. They are sleeping now. Not so much 500 years ago, it was the reverse. A beautiful exception seems to be parts of Southern Europe still active when they should have fallen into darkness. This may be because of the E.U.

As for North America, don't forget that we were Asian-Like before being invaded by so called western peoples with Africans.

Western has multiple definitions however. Once upon a time when the world was flat (And it was in the human mind, still is in most minds),
the West was the Roman Empire, the East was east>>> of that. Choose your flavor.

So, the North America you are looking at is currently in the bonds of Roman pretenders, but that will end. We will find our Asian character again. If you are wondering, I am not particularly African or Asian.

The point being that their are many America's/North America's. At the moment because we are wrapped up in NATO due to history, the definition of Western is excessively tilted towards the Club Med faction, when in fact it should be balanced between northern and southern factions.

America is in cultural wars just now, and that is not due to end for 10 more years. We currently have a president who has an unusual concept of what we should do. In a way it was good to have him shake things up, and see what shakes loose. However, I think it is an aberration and that there is a very good chance that America will emerge with a new perspective, and will no longer be obsessed with protecting the Roman Empire (2000 years ago) from technological Asiatic hordes.

The Russians were our allies in WWII, and few know it, but in the Civil war, (Of America), Russians helped to keep the Europeans from joining the war against the Feds. (Like it or not).

Truth? Well lets see in 10-20 years if we are still here to see.

SpaceNut · 2015-10-12 15:06:10

martienne lots of velcro comes to mind. At the current it does seem that only the rich can go to space but even when a cheap ride (Russian $50 million a seat via SpaceAdventures) by those that are rich is a given the quantity that have given there money for the trip has been less than a dozen, which is not what should have happened if we want the masses to go to live and work.

Space X is now getting ready for manned flight but what will it cost for non Nasa Astronauts to go is the question. Now we need the likes of Boeing, Lockheed and others to do the same when it comes to providing launch capability to orbit and beyond services.

We keep talking about profits but its the service that Nasa controls for why there are no services or any one else even if they can afford the costs as Nasa is saying NO.

martienne · 2015-10-12 15:43:53

Yeah, interesting post, Void. I agree with you.

My main point was essentially that planning a journey to Mars requires

1 - Vision, motivation and drive that is not economically motivated.
2 - Commitment to see it through - it will probably need 10-15 years.

I'm just not seeing those qualities in the US right now.
They are more likely in Russia + Russia has existing facilities and know-how.

But mainly - it seems to me Asia and primarily China!

(As much as I would like it to be Europe or Russia that goes to Mars)

Democracy can be an obstacle to achieving the goal. The project needs a government that can set long term goals and stick to them without worrying about media turning the project, about having to do a re-election campaign in the middle of the project. Companies aren't democracies either, but they have to deliver return to shareholders every year...

All of this speaks for China, I think. Mars would be the ultimate proof that China had really arrived....

Possibly EU - it's large enough, it has the skills and the Commission is not democratically elected. They can commit to large long term projects - the problem is reaching a consensus.

Too bad this isn't a project that can be open source and crowd-funded!
The very last thing I want to see is Mars being "claimed" by some corporation because they were there first...

SpaceNut · 2015-10-12 16:24:51

Not a bad idea to open source and crowd-funded space flight martienne; In one sense we are talking about space as the open source portion of the planning of a mission here on this forum but we do lack the billions needed to make it happen. There has been some crowd-funding attempts...
Fly me to the moon! Why the future of space exploration will be crowd-funded

New Mars colony mission to be crowdfunded

http://www.marspolar.space/
The MarsPolar venture, which plans to create the first settlement on the Red Planet around 2029, is hoping it will be able to raise enough money to cover the costs of the pioneering journey.
“I hope that we will have enough to contract the rover teams, to start preparing our first mission of sending two rovers to Mars,” Arteum Goncharov, the co-founder and CEO of MarsPolar told astrowatch.net.
The crowdfunding campaign is scheduled to start on July 1 and will last 45 days, ending on Aug. 14. The team has stated that they will probably choose the Indiegogo site to run their campaign from. Goncharov is mulling the idea of securing the collected funds, even if the certain goal is not achieved – an option offered by the platform.
MarsPolar wants to collect at least $100.000 to provide funding for the initial stage of the project, particularly to establish its base in Dubai, United Arab Emirates (UAE). This will allow the venture to take first steps towards contracting new partners or hiring engineers and scientists.
Any amount collected over the estimated minimum goal would push the project forward to sending the first colonists to Mars. However, the team admits that it’s hard to predict the exact sum of money required for the mission success.
“If now, the mission costs billions of dollars, in the future that mission might cost less than one billion. Now [we] have [a] good example of sending [an] unmanned mission to Mars only for $74 million by India. It shows us, that we can do all this things cheaper and still on the same level as governmental space giants,” he added.

British Lunar Missions group plans crowdfunded lunar mission

Lunar Missions Ltd. has announced an ambitious plan to send an unmanned robotic lander to the Moon’s South Pole within 10 year’s time. Lunar Mission One was unveiled during last week’s Reinventing Space 2014 conference held in London. The primary goal of Lunar Mission One is to drill to a depth of at least 66 feet (20 meters) below the lunar surface and possibly as far as 328 feet (100 meters). The probe will also bury a time capsule containing messages, photos and even hair samples from mission backers as part of the mission’s unique fundraising and public outreach strategy.

SpaceNut · 2015-10-12 19:16:54

martienne, I had a great post that when I hit send entered the realm of nothing as the server disconnected my connection....

Did a movie The Martian just inspire “Are we really going to Mars?”: House subcommittee discusses space exploration

“I want to comment on the recent handout that we have all seen by the administration called ‘NASA’s Journey to Mars’. This proposal contains no budget; it contains no schedule, no deadlines. This sounds good, but it is actually a journey to nowhere until we have that budget and we have the schedule and we have the deadlines,” said Lamar Smith (R-Texas).

Thats the same problem that is plaquing the SLS... Nasa fix it.

Void · 2015-10-12 21:20:23

True Spacenut. Martienne seems to require a response on previous business. I will try to weave the two together if it is possible for me.

Martienne said:

Yeah, interesting post, Void. I agree with you.
My main point was essentially that planning a journey to Mars requires
1 - Vision, motivation and drive that is not economically motivated.
2 - Commitment to see it through - it will probably need 10-15 years.
I'm just not seeing those qualities in the US right now.
They are more likely in Russia + Russia has existing facilities and know-how.

I can offer you to study the 4th turning. You may or may not dismiss it as you wish.

Without that, we are it would seem in agreement on trends that are obvious on the map. I will say however, that in my estimation, North America will be taken into the Euro-Asiatic network, and will prosper there. Some other Pacific nations will also find this transition worthwhile. I feel that this will prove true, because those areas will be actively functional, whereas others will be less so. Not my fault if it proves to be true. However I do not believe that North America, Western South America, and Europe should waste their time on dysfunctional parts of the planet. They should work with those who may be able to forge a future. Hopefully one which includes human expansion in many ways, including into space. It is not my fault if large sections of the world are not functional and do not make a contribution to technological abilities. They can always make me a liar, and surprise us. Good on them if they do.

As for "Not economically motivated" actually I could give you a way to make it economically motivated, but lets try doing things with the best intentions first, settle for a lesser path later if necessary.

Spacenut said:

Thats the same problem that is plaquing the SLS... Nasa fix it.

Yes, but say what you will, they kept the shark swimming, breathing. It may be cold blooded, but at least it isn't dead yet.

But yes, hopeful! Maybe it is coming time for a review and update, maybe we will keep what we have, and get more serious about it, and maybe even get the Moon back into the plan!

Last edited by Void (2015-10-12 21:28:03)

Terraformer · 2015-10-13 07:58:04

Can we construct an economically viable ladder to Mars? It's very unlikely that a manned mission could have a positive return on investment if it was done right now, but can fuel depots be justified? What about the life support and habitats required, which Bigelow seems to think are a viable invesment? Can we develop the in-situ resource utilisation techniques here on Terra, and can they have a positive impact here?

Basically, spending $5 billion on a Mars mission right now might not be viable, but might we get to a point where we could put one together off the shelf for $1 billion? It wouldn't be hard to get funding then, if you put it up at auction among the nations of the world... you might (probably) even be able to bypass the governments and sell it straight to a consortium of billionaires.

martienne · 2015-10-13 08:35:53

Void -OK on your ASPAC idea (as much as I hate the TPP initiative - perhaps that's the way things are going).

But the trouble for proud Americans with this idea is that China is likely to throw the most money on it, they may well be the ones manufacturing most of the hardware and they may possibly expect to take a lead as a result.
Can you live with that? Can the US?

Can China go it alone? They did do their own space flight.... Maybe they can go to the Moon, as a "practice run" of a manned landing first, which would take them up to the same level of experience that the US has.

I don't think Russia could justify to its citizens, the expenditure of a Russian led Mars mission. So I don't think they will do it, at least not alone and within 15 years or so. Putin delivers mostly what the population wants - that's why he's so popular. He would not rock the boat with something as risky as Mars. There are plenty of cool prestige projects that need sorting internally in Russia that have more practical meaning than Mars. Russia has a lot of things going for it, but their plans for improving the country will take a couple of decades to bear fruit, assuming they work in the first place.
Possibly, Russia would consider a joint effort with China.

China is not a democracy and would not have to answer questions to voters about why they are spending billions on a Mars mission while people live in poverty.

The ESA - forget it, no. They wouldn't even be able to decide what language to speak on the mission, and the EU would be lucky to even survive another 15 years.

So my personal conclusion is that China is our best bet for a Mars mission. Perhaps with additional sponsoring from exposure-hungry tech companies with lots of spare cash. let's say, Google, Apple and some Asian technical company.

Overall I don't feel very optimistic right now. It feels like there's always something standing in the way for Mars.
Mars One seems to be dismissed by everyone remotely serious.

Void · 2015-10-13 13:33:43

Perhaps if I told you a Badtime story you could go to sleep and feel at ease?

Dear mratienne,

There once was a martienne who worried if something would happen, instead of what would happen if something didn't happen. Martienne experienced privation and the big bad wolf ate him for dinner.

The end

Terraformer · 2015-10-13 14:25:41

*her.

Unless Martienne is from a country where Anna is a male name...

Void · 2015-10-13 19:44:37

Thanks for the update. Sorry about the badtime story (Sort of).

Actually, I don't know if societies will crumble without space resources, but I really would not bet on them prospering without them.

Tom Kalbfus · 2015-10-13 21:15:10

martienne wrote:

Tom Kalbfus wrote:
Imagine a space hotel which looked like this! How much would it cost?
Why go to space to stay at the Mariott.....
Plus, in order for it to look like that, it woud need artificial gravity!
As for lack of motivation and passion for Mars among Americans... Yes - because I Americans dreams are more about getting rich!

Getting into space is very expensive, kind of makes sense that the first private citizens to go into space and stay at the space Marriott will be rich people! Rich people are the bridge to developing space tourism, once there is a market established by rich people, then competition for those rich tourists will cause the space companies to find ways to lower costs. NASA has no incentive to do that!

People in Russia love space, there is still a big excitement about it that I think is less prevalent in the US. I think there is a good chance that Russia gets back in the game. (Whether it can achieve results is another story! )

When was the last Russian probe to the outer planets? Have the Russians ever send any successful missions to Mars, we have sent a bunch, I haven't seen the Russian doing much beyond the moon or Venus, can you think of anything?

My outlook on the future of the US is negative. I think that country is going down the drain and that it won't be able to finance or commit to a project of the magnitude of going to Mars.

Who just recently sent that probe to Pluto and to Mercury, do you know of any other country which did that? You know if it weren't for US participation, we would know a lot less about our Solar System. The outer planets, especially Uranus and Neptune would just be blurry blobs in our telescope, Pluto would be just a tiny little dot that moves against the background of stars. Mercury would be terra incognita.

My guess of who goes to Mars, is an ambitious coalition of "newer" players on the political arena who want to prove something to their own citizens and the world. I.e.
—China

They are still doing their own version of project Mercury and Gemini.

—Iran (loves to show off technical skills and has potential to get very rich due to oil)

Iran has little interest in space exploration other than the parts which can be turned into weapons to use against their "Great Satan!" (Us)

—Australia
—EU (if it survives the current crisis)
—Possibly Russia (once it's out of the current pinch and reasonably on top of domestic problems)

The Empire Strikes Back! Putin's interest in space is much as the Nazis were, that is it was to be used to help conquer territory on the Earth. Putin is not interested in conquering space, as there are no people who live there. Most Empire builders are not interested in empty land where they have to send colonists to, they want lands already peopled that they can conquer, they are too lazy to send their own people!

—Possibly various Asian tiger countries contributers.
I think the US lacks the vision or cohesiveness to pull it off. The US is driven by large corporation and an interest in quick profits. Mars isn't amenable to that. It would initially simply be about science, human curioosity and prestige.
I don't think anything of interest for Mars will come out of the Middle East, Latin America or Africa.
Another thing that speaks against the US are the frequent leadership changes.

I believe that is called democracy, do you think we need a dictator? The Soviets had a few, but they never went to Mars, they only tried to go to the Moon to compete with us, their interests was with what was on Earth, not what was in space, they went into space for the propaganda potential to convince people on Earth that Communism was superior to Capitalism, it was a means to an end, not an end in itself.

Ambitious projects needs more stability and ideology to complete, than the US environment offers.

Dictators don't always do what you want. Putin is a dictator, and has been running Russia for the last 15 years, he could have send manned missions to Mars by now if he really wanted to, or at least the Moon, but he didn't go their either!

China's government is stable - they could commit to something long term and see it through.
Russia too, although Lord knows what will happen when Putin retires in the 2020s. Stability probably depends on whether a new strong leader will emerge on the scene.

If it needs a strong leader, that shows how unstable it is. The United States has outlasted several Empires with strong leaders such as Napoleon, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and will probably outlast Putin as well, because America is a nation of laws and not of men. We change our leaders rather frequently, because that is what our system of government is designed to do. I would not trade places with Phaeronic Egypt, would you?

Possibly nothing can happen at all, as there won't be enough space capable countries that are prepared to work with each other.
Perhaps corporations will play a larger role than space in the future, and someone like Google will become to first to go to space!

that is as it should be, any effort that requires the sustained presence of government cannot be sustained.

Tom Kalbfus · 2015-10-13 21:19:45

martienne wrote:

Void -OK on your ASPAC idea (as much as I hate the TPP initiative - perhaps that's the way things are going).
But the trouble for proud Americans with this idea is that China is likely to throw the most money on it, they may well be the ones manufacturing most of the hardware and they may possibly expect to take a lead as a result.
Can you live with that? Can the US?
Can China go it alone? They did do their own space flight.... Maybe they can go to the Moon, as a "practice run" of a manned landing first, which would take them up to the same level of experience that the US has.
I don't think Russia could justify to its citizens, the expenditure of a Russian led Mars mission. So I don't think they will do it, at least not alone and within 15 years or so. Putin delivers mostly what the population wants - that's why he's so popular. He would not rock the boat with something as risky as Mars. There are plenty of cool prestige projects that need sorting internally in Russia that have more practical meaning than Mars. Russia has a lot of things going for it, but their plans for improving the country will take a couple of decades to bear fruit, assuming they work in the first place.
Possibly, Russia would consider a joint effort with China.
China is not a democracy and would not have to answer questions to voters about why they are spending billions on a Mars mission while people live in poverty.
The ESA - forget it, no. They wouldn't even be able to decide what language to speak on the mission, and the EU would be lucky to even survive another 15 years.
So my personal conclusion is that China is our best bet for a Mars mission. Perhaps with additional sponsoring from exposure-hungry tech companies with lots of spare cash. let's say, Google, Apple and some Asian technical company.
Overall I don't feel very optimistic right now. It feels like there's always something standing in the way for Mars.
Mars One seems to be dismissed by everyone remotely serious.

Do you remember why the Chinese weren't the ones to discover America? They certainly had the technical capability to beat the Europeans to the New World, but they burned their treasure ships instead. The problem with one man rule, is often that the one man who rules is often an idiot!

Void · 2015-10-13 21:55:09

martienne sorry about the excessive rough and tumble earlier. Just wanted to dodge some questions. Some things should not be said.

Tom,

Remember who "discovered" America? Not exactly a society adverse to murder, slavery, and rule by Monarchs.

The USA initiated as a result of near Atlantic coast European peoples who were culturally influenced by Native Americans.

French, Dutch, Russians, Swedes, Germans, and of course lots of British. The colonizers to the south (Spanish in particular) hated them and would exterminate them if they could. A lot of these peoples came to North America, because they feared being exterminated in Europe by the Spanish and their Med. Masters. Some also came to escape a retaliatory persecution.

North Atlantic Republicanism/Constitutional Monarchy came into being, because of Atlantic Coastal European contact with the Native American peoples. The founders intentionally incorporated Native American concepts into our system.

But these days the Romanisers deny all of that, and want to go back to the good old days of the Roman Empire. (And fail again).

The (Sino) Asians are up to bat (Again). Don't write them off, they may make very major contributions to human liberty. But then again don't expect too much of them. They are only human also, and we have seldom lived up to our own expectations.

Asia, what a silly concept. Not real at all.

And by the way, looking at China, I am not sure at all that I am witnessing "One Man Rule". Doesn't look like it to me.

Last edited by Void (2015-10-13 22:01:29)

Terraformer · 2015-10-14 05:33:47

China - not likely to be a major player, unless it substantially liberalises. Manufacturing is shifting back to the west as it gets more and more automated, so the only thing China will have going for it is sheer numbers.

Iran - any oil wealth is either going to be dug up soon or remain in the ground, with the way solar power is going. It might have a future if it changes it's government, but not if it has to expend it's energy pacifying the population.

Russia - it's economy is very much dependent upon oil, I think? It's already got problems, hence the need to distract the population with conflicts elsewhere (much like Argentina with the Falklands). I really don't think it will be able to pull off a mission.

martienne · 2015-10-14 06:20:07

Terraformer wrote:

China - not likely to be a major player, unless it substantially liberalises. Manufacturing is shifting back to the west as it gets more and more automated, so the only thing China will have going for it is sheer numbers.
Iran - any oil wealth is either going to be dug up soon or remain in the ground, with the way solar power is going. It might have a future if it changes it's government, but not if it has to expend it's energy pacifying the population.
Russia - it's economy is very much dependent upon oil, I think? It's already got problems, hence the need to distract the population with conflicts elsewhere (much like Argentina with the Falklands). I really don't think it will be able to pull off a mission.

I think you are wrong on China. And don't kid yourself about "liberalising". I think their strength is partly the fact that they have strong leadership that's unlikely to change. No thinking people in Europe have any illusions about the US being credible as a democracy, for a number of reasons. (and the same thing can be said for at least half of the European countries too, for various reasons). Democracy is an illusion in most countries. Even those who like America, usually like it because they suport the "neo" world order where corporations run things and American media dictates who's good or bad and where to invade.

In China they are upfront about not being democratic. Plus - the Communist party is a sort of meritocracy. They skim the cream off the elite from the best universities there, and offer them stable well-paying and prestigous jobs, virtually for life. So they have bright, well-educated and experienced people running the country, centrally. Sure they have corruption and can be somewhet ruthless to their population at times. But it's a very competent country that's going places, whether we like it or not. (I don't like that mentality at all, but nobody can denies that what they are doing is working for them, and mvery fast too).

Iran - I don't think they can do it alone, but they could be a useful partner for someone like China, possibly. They have a huge surplus of young and very well educated people. Iran is incredibly keen to show itself off as forward thinking and modern - to prove that this can work for an islamic state. They have tons of programs to encourage building robots, automation and engineering, and practically free energy. Like Russia, they know they have to get off the oil dependency and they are doing as much as they can.
(As a silly footnote I guess they'll have to make a space suit with a built in hijab for any female astronauts + figure out how to pray facing Mecca when in Space!) But it's a big country that's keen to prove itself and that could work with both China and Russia.

As for Europe / US: -We might be able to do it together. But I don't think either of us have our houses in order. Corporations are running the show. EU is split, confused and broke, the US is greedy, aggressive and both. I fear both our continents are "has-beens" and that the future for space travel lies further East...

Russia - knows it needs to diversify away from oil and gas and has some ambitious projects for it. May or may not pay off.
Russia has huge challenges internally to sort, I don't think it will want to commit to driving a Mars project. Maybe in partnership with China, probably not the US or EU. Russia is in arms about how it's being villified and blackpainted in Western media. I think they trust places like China a lot more even than Europe right now. Not to mention the US.

Unless MarsOne works out (tihi) I don't think anything is in the pipeline for the next 20 years (buhu).
Unless some serious space chemistry suddenly happens between any coalition of China / Russia / Iran.

Terraformer · 2015-10-14 10:03:51

The US has a few companies that together have the capability to pull off a Mars mission, and enough money to pay them to do it. If there was a chance of China getting to Mars, it's not unrealistic to expect Congress to start seeking bids from American consortia (perhaps ULA vs. SpaceX/Bigelow?).

Tom Kalbfus · 2015-10-14 13:26:22

Terraformer wrote:

China - not likely to be a major player, unless it substantially liberalises. Manufacturing is shifting back to the west as it gets more and more automated, so the only thing China will have going for it is sheer numbers.
Iran - any oil wealth is either going to be dug up soon or remain in the ground, with the way solar power is going. It might have a future if it changes it's government, but not if it has to expend it's energy pacifying the population.
Russia - it's economy is very much dependent upon oil, I think? It's already got problems, hence the need to distract the population with conflicts elsewhere (much like Argentina with the Falklands). I really don't think it will be able to pull off a mission.

If Putin goes down, Russia could get back in the game and be our friends again. With China its the same deal!

martienne · 2015-10-14 13:52:20

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

If Putin goes down, Russia could get back in the game and be our friends again. With China its the same deal!

The US is a false friend that's not worth having. The short decade or so that Russia was the US' friend was the worst decade in the history of the country. Poverty, corruption, national humiliation and looting of the state's property.

The US only likes 'friends' it can boss around, like the UK, and friends that will accept being spied on and under constant occupation, like Germany. It's pathetic really.

Neither Russia nor China will put up with such friendship.

And if my country was every taken over by a dictatorship, I'll take my chances with the dictator any day, over a US liberation which seems to be 10 times worse, more dangerous and depressing than even the worst dictatorship. And that's precisely what the Iraqis and Afghans are thinking as they are pouring into Europe by the hundreds of thousands, or joining islamic terrorist groups (or both!)

I don't know why Putin persists in always saying "our American partners" when he talks about the US, when the US is constantly busy with their anti-Russian propaganda..

As for the Chinese - they own you! Those sly Chinese will turn the table on the US when the time is good and ready. And they operate on long term perspective - they were writing poetry and creating fine art while we in Europe were running around half naked in primitive stone mazes. They don't mind waiting a decade or three but I am sure their plan is to become the "middle kingdom" again.

RobertDyck · 2015-10-14 14:44:09

martienne, there is some truth to what you say. But the way you say it comes across as propaganda. It's as bad as what we hear from American media about Putin. I could repeat reports of Russian involvement in Ukraine. But let's try to damp down the propaganda. If I had my way, I would like to make Putin a serious offer:

First: hold another referendum in Crimea. We understand that Crimea was never part of Ukraine before they were both part of the Soviet Union. Which Soviet republic administered it was moot. The problem was not Crimea going to Russia vs Ukraine, the problem was taking it by military action. And the so called "referendum" was a joke. Russia conducted military exercised on the Ukraine border, obviously threatening to invade. There were armed men running around the streets during the referendum, and Putin has admitted many of those were Russian soldiers. The ones who took Ukrainian military bases in Crimea were all Russian soldiers. And ballot boxes were transparent, so everyone could see how an individual voted. That allows intimidation of voters. And ethnic Tatars had a big black "X" painted across their homes. Any one of these things invalidates the referendum. And then there's counting: highly suspect.

So my first recommendation is a new referendum in Crimea. It will be administered by Canadian and European officials. Ukrainian and Russian representatives can observe, but not interfere. During Canadian elections, representatives for candidates can observe but not interfere. Election boxes will not be transparent. For Canadian federal election, they're cardboard sealed with tape. For civic elections in my city, the ballot box is translucent plastic. You can see how many ballots are in there, but can't read them. For this referendum, one or the other. But the key is to ensure no one can see how an individual voted, so no voter can be intimidated. And no one with guns anywhere near the voting place. No candidates, no posters, no campaign material inside the voting place, or within 50 metres of the entrance to the voting place. No military exercises west of the Ural mountains. Violation of this rule would cede Crimea to Ukraine. No intimidation of voters; if Russia is found guilty then they lose Crimea. If an individual who isn't a Russian official is found guilty, they will be arrested and incarcerated in prison for a very long time. The purpose is to run a real, fair, unbiased referendum. If Putin truly believes people in Crimea want to be part of Russian, not Ukraine, then he shouldn't be afraid. They'll vote to do so again.

Should Crimea vote for Russia, then Russia has to refund to Ukraine all the money that was in Ukrainian banks in Crimea. I could argue for compensation for military bases or damage to ships, but we'll let that slide. Once all that is done, then the West must remove all sanctions.

Next eastern Ukraine. That isn't up for debate, that's Ukrainian. Canada and Europe will send in troops to escort rebels out of Ukraine. Russia will accept them as refugees. By the laws of any country I know, taking up arms against your own country is considered high treason. That's a capital offence. The rebels will not be executed, they will be allowed to leave unharmed. They will be photographed, their names recorded, finger prints taken. So if they ever return to Ukraine, they will be arrested at the border. They will be allowed to sell their house, either sell their possessions or have them sent by moving truck to meet them in Russia. And they will be allowed to transfer their bank balance to an account in Russia. So they will keep everything. But once they're gone, they will not be allowed back in Ukraine. The Ukrainian government will resume control over all of Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts.

Ukraine will join the EU as a full member. They will also be an associate member of Putin's Eurasian Union. So Ukraine will do trade with both Europe and Russia. Ukraine will resume sale of arms to Russia, including high tech military equipment like a system capable of detecting/tracking/targeting American stealth aircraft. So Putin gets to protect the Russian economy. Ukraine will not join NATO, but will not join any Russian alliance either.

If Putin agrees to this, then I would like to offer the Mars program. Again, I suggest a Canadian-led international mission to send humans to Mars. And the US will not be invited. Canada will pay for repair of the high bays of building #112 at the Baikonur Cosmodrome. That's the vehicle assembly building for Energia. Canada will pay for restoration of infrastructure for Energia, but only as much as was asked of NASA in 1994, plus inflation. This Mars mission will use Energia; not any all-Russian launch vehicle. Energia has engines manufactured in Russia, launched from Baikonur in Kazakhstan, strap-on boosters are manufactured in east Ukraine, core module fuel tanks are manufactured in Russia but transported to the launch site on the Antonov An-225 Mriya. That aircraft is designed, built, and operated from Kiev (Kyiv). Part of the point is to ensure cooperation. For this Mars program, Canada will design and build the spacecraft. Russia will pay for manufacture, vehicle integration, launch services, and propellant for the Energia launch vehicle. Russia will also pay for development, testing, manufacture, etc. of the Energia Upper Stage. Europe will pay for an orbiter to demonstrate aerocapture. And Europe will pay for a robotic Mars sample-return mission as a technology demonstrator for ISPP. Australia will provide a deep space station for telemetry. Canada will provide the 50-metre Algonquin dish as another deep space station. We can integrate with European and Russian assets for the deep space network. Japan will probably want to join, and perhaps other countries such as China or India. More countries means the cost can be spread out more. With Canada, Russia, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, the entire European Space Agency, Australia, and perhaps these other countries, this will demonstrate international cooperation. It'll also show we can do great things without the US. I'm sure Putin would like that.

But the prerequisite before we can even think of doing this is to end the conflict in Ukraine.

Last edited by RobertDyck (2015-10-15 11:24:26)

Tom Kalbfus · 2015-10-14 15:28:05

martienne wrote:

Tom Kalbfus wrote:
If Putin goes down, Russia could get back in the game and be our friends again. With China its the same deal!
The US is a false friend that's not worth having. The short decade or so that Russia was the US' friend was the worst decade in the history of the country. Poverty, corruption, national humiliation and looting of the state's property.

So what is it about Barack Obama's policies that you don't like? Lets get specific here Martienne. Would a change of Presidents make you like my country a whole lot better? Would you rather have "the Donald?"

martienne wrote:

The US only likes 'friends' it can boss around, like the UK, and friends that will accept being spied on and under constant occupation, like Germany. It's pathetic really.

Germany got occupied because it started World War II, does that strike you as somehow "unfair?"

martienne wrote:

Neither Russia nor China will put up with such friendship.
And if my country was every taken over by a dictatorship, I'll take my chances with the dictator any day, over a US liberation which seems to be 10 times worse, more dangerous and depressing than even the worst dictatorship.

Ten times worse than this dictator?

How about this one?

martienne wrote:

[And that's precisely what the Iraqis and Afghans are thinking as they are pouring into Europe by the hundreds of thousands, or joining islamic terrorist groups (or both!)

Are you calling the refugees terrorists? That's not me calling them that, that is you.

martienne wrote:

I don't know why Putin persists in always saying "our American partners" when he talks about the US, when the US is constantly busy with their anti-Russian propaganda..

What anti-Russian propaganda are you accusing the Obama Administration of propagating, can you give a specific example of the Obama Administration issuing anti-Russian Propaganda, Obama's grandfather spoke Russian by the way, so if you are accusing Barack Obama of having a anti-Russian bias please show the evidence!

martienne wrote:

As for the Chinese - they own you! Those sly Chinese will turn the table on the US when the time is good and ready. And they operate on long term perspective - they were writing poetry and creating fine art while we in Europe were running around half naked in primitive stone mazes.

And what were the Chinese doing when we were colonizing the New World, and by the way colonizing them? Not so clever I think! The Chinese are only as smart as their current Emperor, they have had some smart ones and they have had some dumb ones, that's the problem with Emperors, and they are not accountable to the people, they don't run for election, whoever is born to be Emperor is what the Chinese are stuck with. China has an Emperor today, he's not called an Emperor, but he is just as accountable to the popular will as the ancient Emperors of yore.

martienne wrote:

They don't mind waiting a decade or three but I am sure their plan is to become the "middle kingdom" again.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#51 2015-07-28 06:39:36

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

#52 2015-09-12 22:48:59

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

#53 2015-09-13 07:20:44

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

#54 2015-10-12 09:12:38

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

#55 2015-10-12 10:45:11

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

#56 2015-10-12 15:06:10

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

#57 2015-10-12 15:43:53

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

#58 2015-10-12 16:24:51

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

#59 2015-10-12 19:16:54

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

#60 2015-10-12 21:20:23

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

#61 2015-10-13 07:58:04

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

#62 2015-10-13 08:35:53

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

#63 2015-10-13 13:33:43

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

#64 2015-10-13 14:25:41

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

#65 2015-10-13 19:44:37

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

#66 2015-10-13 21:15:10

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

#67 2015-10-13 21:19:45

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

#68 2015-10-13 21:55:09

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

#69 2015-10-14 05:33:47

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

#70 2015-10-14 06:20:07

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

#71 2015-10-14 10:03:51

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

#72 2015-10-14 13:26:22

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

#73 2015-10-14 13:52:20

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

#74 2015-10-14 14:44:09

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

#75 2015-10-14 15:28:05

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

Board footer