Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

SpaceNut · 2004-08-11 09:48:29

The Space Commercial Human Ascent Serving Expeditions Act

AKA the Space CHASE Act

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=13632

Snipet:
"The Congress finds that--
(1) the goal of opening space to the American people and their private commercial, scientific, and cultural enterprises should guide Federal space investments, policies, and regulations;

(2) private industry has begun to develop commercial launch vehicles capable of carrying human beings into space, and greater private investment in these efforts will stimulate the Nation's commercial space transportation industry as a whole;

(3) space transportation is inherently risky;

(4) a critical area of responsibility for the Office of the Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation is to regulate the emerging commercial human space flight industry; and

(5) the public interest is served by creating a clear legal and regulatory regime for commercial human space flight.

end snipet:

We are on the verge of allowing for the first time not only governments but the private industry and the people who have the desire to gain access into space. Who knows were we will be in a few years or even a decade or two but the real journey will take a small step forward if it is ever signed into Law in the right direction. To allow more people to become more involved in all facets of the exploration vision.

bolbuyk · 2004-08-12 07:10:25

Let's hope the private industry get a fair chance and is not restricted in many ways, eg type and amount of propelants, and that kind of things.

SpaceNut · 2004-08-12 07:26:07

I got a feeling that Nasa experts will probably be required to do inspections of any rockets designs by others for safety reason reviews or of some other organizational watch dog group.

comstar03 · 2004-08-14 00:39:51

I don't think the licensing of space activiteis should be done from any country but from a international body under the control of the United Nations. Made up of one representative from USA, Russia, Europe, Japan, China, and Australia, with three other representative chosen by the UN and rotated every six months. Panel of nine makes decisions by majority with strict guidelines on bio-sphere and human safety and aherence to global space related treaties. On vessel design, or propulsion system or live support systems or reasons for space activity, only if they conflict with safety issues.

Martian Republic · 2004-08-14 10:01:41

I don't think the licensing of space activiteis should be done from any country but from a international body under the control of the United Nations. Made up of one representative from USA, Russia, Europe, Japan, China, and Australia, with three other representative chosen by the UN and rotated every six months. Panel of nine makes decisions by majority with strict guidelines on bio-sphere and human safety and aherence to global space related treaties. On vessel design, or propulsion system or live support systems or reasons for space activity, only if they conflict with safety issues.

I don't like that idea, because you are giving some non-government agency authority over the governments that is not accountable to the people. Beside it will be the governments that will ultimately create the business climate for the private space ventures in this country or any other country for that matter. So I think it should be left with the individual governments responsible to regulate there private venture, but with a United Nations as an observer board to keep an eye on the dangers that may arise between nation or make suggestions or general policies that should be adopted by other nations to avert conflicts and smooth out the areas as we go into space. That kind of a gentlemen’s agreement between nation for space development or for doing business in space. The United Nations should never be treated like a government with governing regulations for either in space or down here in the different countries, but should always remain as a collection of nations that meet to solve problems or discuss issue for a common good of all nations of the earth. The UN is a great meeting place for this kind of activities and the UN should never be anything more than that or treated like it a government.

Larry,

bolbuyk · 2004-08-14 11:20:19

I don't think the licensing of space activiteis should be done from any country but from a international body under the control of the United Nations. Made up of one representative from USA, Russia, Europe, Japan, China, and Australia, with three other representative chosen by the UN and rotated every six months. Panel of nine makes decisions by majority with strict guidelines on bio-sphere and human safety and aherence to global space related treaties. On vessel design, or propulsion system or live support systems or reasons for space activity, only if they conflict with safety issues.

Please, not UN. They've already too much work to do. Maybe something like an international commitee with people from different space agencies that can give some advice to governments.

Grypd · 2004-08-14 14:55:28

Currently under the treaties that the space launching nations use it is a requirement that all launches into space be logged with the UN and the mission of said launch and its planned location.

This is to ensure that conflict between these nations does not start in space. This means any country that launches a mission must if asked inform the asker what the country plans for that mission. Also any maned object in space like a space station or base may be visited by any other nation as long as they give reasonable notice etc.

These seem to be some of the base rules which all space vehicles must adhere too as long as there host nation is a member of the outer space treaty.

comstar03 · 2004-08-14 19:07:23

Gryd,

I don't think that any government of any country have the right to go into outer space, because they only represent on aspect of the world. I believe that any human leaving earth should be governed by a world body for the whole of humanity. That means government paid launches or private industry paid launches.

Your License should be granted from the United Earth Space Council , not the United states Country Space Administration or The russian space authority or the chinese space authority or european space authority or even the Australian Space authority.

By seeing the answers, So far it will take some time for that reality to come true.

GCNRevenger · 2004-08-14 21:43:38

I don't think the licensing of space activiteis should be done from any country but from a international body under the control of the United Nations... Panel of nine makes decisions by majority with strict guidelines on bio-sphere and human safety and aherence to global space related treaties. On vessel design, or propulsion system or live support systems or reasons for space activity, only if they conflict with safety issues.

Surely you must be joking... putting all spaceflight under ultimate control of a buracratic body at the UN? Iiii don't think so. This world is still a world of nations, soverign ones, and spaceflight is as much an activity of national interest and prestiege that to put it in the hands of the UN is a punchline, not a proposition. People are still delinated by their nationality one way or another, and unless we run into space aliens, collective "reprisenation" of humanity is a notion without a purpose.

The United Nations as a functioning body right now is a perilous proposition... it is on the edge of being marginalized with its designs to be a world government, which it is not. Its members have little ability to project much practical military power except America, it is financialy ruined in large degree, it is corrupt all the way to the Secretariat, and the ease of which it is swayed by bands of dictators or obstructionist powers makes it particularly difficult to take seriously...

comstar03 · 2004-08-14 21:54:04

GCNRevenger,

On your Soap Box, I see, Firstly the United Earth Space Council would have the representatives of all the senior nations ( USA, RUSSIA, CHINA, and EUROPE ) plus Three members from the other nations, This would allow space to be developed for all humanity under the treaty signed by all the major space nations.

It would show that we have grown-up to expand into space in a meaningful way for the long term benefit of humanity. If we go down the road of individual nations deciding , then it would probably come down to individual corporations and individuals deciding as well, to support or not these guidelines, because that is what people are going to see if they are not enforced the same across the world.

These licensing provisions and licenses MUST be uniform.

comstar03 · 2004-08-14 21:57:13

Also,

When it gets to Mars, or any other asteroid, or planet, again the UESC can be the place where the draft planetary charters and citizens rights are developed.

comstar03 · 2004-08-14 22:01:03

It won't take that long for corporations and indviduals to expand into space and start claims their own slice and they will probably start enforcing their rights ( similar to the ways, the other land rushes and issues previously were settled. )

Don't have issues for the future, build clear global policies controlled globally.

GCNRevenger · 2004-08-15 00:14:50

"I don't think that any government of any country have the right to go into outer space..."

Ya huh, why not?

"Firstly the United Earth Space Council would have the representatives of all the senior nations..."

Unless the reprisentatives are from America, America, and America, then I don't think any body has the right to tell America what to do with its space program. If America signs treaties with other nations like with the ISS, then that is America's perogitive... but to hand over authority to an international body? No no, I think not.

And you seem to think that [Nationalism + Space = Bad] because people will start deciding how to live in space as they see fit?... Well yeah, thats a little thing called freedom, and ultimatly a good thing for perminant colonies.

"It would show that we have grown-up to expand into space in a meaningful way for the long term benefit of humanity."

We are grown up enough to expand into space, and we will benefit humanity, just not collectivly, and definatly not under the aeigs of a not just planetary but interplanetary one-state government. Just as capitalism works to better society by the individual becoming wealthier, so too will future Nationalist colonies be freer under the flag of an Earthly nation or one their own, and their contributions to the freedom of mankind.

comstar03 · 2004-08-15 01:11:03

GCNRevenger,

I am all for Nationalism on Earth, but it should stop at the earth / space boundary and that we are earthlings / Human Beings from earth after that point.

If it doesn't then we get into a large sticky issue of military in space and that was what all the agreements and treaties have ruled out from day one. But, the larger nations of the world haven't ruled it out, all have space ready forces to attack from ground to space, to be deployed in space, it doesn't matter which country you talk about.

I love capitalism but not nationalism in space. Nationalism should be converted into planetarism when we leave earth for outer space.

I know its a dream, its not going to be real in my lifetime, I know that I will have to contend with little nationalism ideas running into outer space like we have on earth.

Things will get complicated in Outer Space.

deagleninja · 2004-08-15 05:19:38

Hmmm, interesting debate going on here.

United Nation space governence vs individual soverign government flights.

I can see many benefits to our 'handing over' of the space program to the UN or something like it. We are already the world's supplier of War, why not supply the world with a space program too?

For one, it would be much easier to rationalize a much larger budget for NASA because we would need to be flying international scientists and popular figures into space.

Think about it for a second. The world has over 200 countries in it, most of which can't afford their own space program. If you could collect an average of $1B per country then you have, theoretically, a possible budget of over $200B a year as opposed to $15B.

Think also of how often in the past 50 years the few space programs of the world have wasted money repeating the same things their rivals have done.

If we truly want the human race to become a space faring people then we must include all people and all generations.

History has shown us that when a country like the US has virtually all the space capability, the effort can't be sustained.

Martian Republic · 2004-08-15 07:48:16

Hmmm, interesting debate going on here.
United Nation space governence vs individual soverign government flights.
I can see many benefits to our 'handing over' of the space program to the UN or something like it. We are already the world's supplier of War, why not supply the world with a space program too?
For one, it would be much easier to rationalize a much larger budget for NASA because we would need to be flying international scientists and popular figures into space.
Think about it for a second. The world has over 200 countries in it, most of which can't afford their own space program. If you could collect an average of $1B per country then you have, theoretically, a possible budget of over $200B a year as opposed to $15B.
Think also of how often in the past 50 years the few space programs of the world have wasted money repeating the same things their rivals have done.
If we truly want the human race to become a space faring people then we must include all people and all generations.
History has shown us that when a country like the US has virtually all the space capability, the effort can't be sustained.

There are two ways to look at it.

You though out an idea that has never worked in the past and there is no indication that it will work in the future either. Of that two hundred billion dollars that you intend to raise each year from those 200 country only about 50 or 60 are actually big enough to afford one billion dollars a year and the other country's are primarily just fly speck on the world map. Like they just have a few million people to maybe tens of thousands of people. Defenetly not nation that can afford one billion dollars a year for a space program.

But, there are advantages to working together to decrease development cost and such. So I have no problem with that.

But, as far as to why the space does not seen to be sustainable, we should look at NASA history of who affected it. You would have to follow what Kennedy did and what Wall Street did along with the Federal Reserve System and the banking system.

What Kennedy did, set NASA into motion and space development of new technology with the prospect of building the infrastructure in space. This was under the old Gold Reserve Standard, Brenton Wood System of investing in long term low interest loans in building infrastructure and developing new technologies. We also had a Kennedy tax right off system for business to invest in new machines to improve productive of the work force and other such capital improvements to promote advances. Kennedy also setup several project that were lined up one behind the other for development by NASA. Start off with rocket and then move to shuttle programs with chemical rockets. The go to fission rockets called Orion. Then go to fusion rockets. Beside a Moon Landing and base, he also had a Mars Landing planed too and a program for that too.

In 1971 this banking system was done away with and a floating exchange rate took it place. The low interest in long term investment infrastructure and development was eliminated. The Kennedy tax right off system was also eliminated for business, so also no longer exist. Finally the complaint that we are wasting too much money on NASA when we have all these hungry people worldwide. The money that was taken from NASA didn't go for the hungry people worldwide, but went into Wall Street to help finance the beginning of the Wall Street that we now have. But, these NASA programs were all the suddenly not affordable anymore. Now the were affordable two or three years ago before the 1971 floating exchange rate act under the old system of economics, but there not affordable now. So the NASA budgets got cut by 50% or more and these programs started getting canceled one by one.

If you check out what I have just written, you will find out that that is so. So the question is:

Was the U.S. Space Program by NASA just not sustainable by the United States and it was bound to happen no matter what we did NASA to keep it going or was it not sustainable, because of economic policies shift inside the United States with it banking policies of short term loans with high interest and investing in Wall Street?

If it because of the economic banking policies shifts inside the United States was what shut NASA down, then extending this to other nation would not help the space programs in other country either. Because, the same people that shut NASA will also be the same people that will also shut down a combined world effort too.

However if the other view is correct, it just too big for one country. Then you might have a point.

Which I don't agree with this opinion, but people do have it so, here it is.

Larry,

GCNRevenger · 2004-08-15 11:23:37

"The money that was taken from NASA didn't go for the hungry people worldwide, but went into Wall Street to help finance the beginning of the Wall Street that we now have. But, these NASA programs were all the suddenly not affordable anymore." - MartianRepublic

I don't think that banking had much or anything to do with NASA's "affordability," the trouble was that the nation was no longer willing to sacrifice the money for space travel, now that the Communists were beaten to the Moon and Kennedy's posthumous legacy fulfilled. People didn't care anymore was the problem... You wouldn't by chance be a big fan of Lyndon LaRouche are you MRepublic?

"I am all for Nationalism on Earth, but it should stop at the earth / space boundary and that we are earthlings / Human Beings from earth after that point." - Comstar

Really? Why not? Nationalism seems to be working pretty well on Earth, and collective governance has largely failed. Even the EU constitution is being waterd down substantially. Nationalism (or at least self-determination) is going to be with us for a long time, it may never go away, because it gives people a logical framework that gives freedom without needing permission. A one-world (or one-solar system) government is a dream allright, A Nightmare.

War and violence is always going to be with us... Thats just the way humans are wired north of the neck, and isn't ever going to go away as long as humans are free. And that is too high of a price to pay... And as we travel into space, the concept of militaries will follow. It is inevitiable.

Martian Republic · 2004-08-15 12:45:39

"The money that was taken from NASA didn't go for the hungry people worldwide, but went into Wall Street to help finance the beginning of the Wall Street that we now have. But, these NASA programs were all the suddenly not affordable anymore." - MartianRepublic
I don't think that banking had much or anything to do with NASA's "affordability," the trouble was that the nation was no longer willing to sacrifice the money for space travel, now that the Communists were beaten to the Moon and Kennedy's posthumous legacy fulfilled. People didn't care anymore was the problem... You wouldn't by chance be a big fan of Lyndon LaRouche are you MRepublic?
"I am all for Nationalism on Earth, but it should stop at the earth / space boundary and that we are earthlings / Human Beings from earth after that point." - Comstar
Really? Why not? Nationalism seems to be working pretty well on Earth, and collective governance has largely failed. Even the EU constitution is being waterd down substantially. Nationalism (or at least self-determination) is going to be with us for a long time, it may never go away, because it gives people a logical framework that gives freedom without needing permission. A one-world (or one-solar system) government is a dream allright, A Nightmare.
War and violence is always going to be with us... Thats just the way humans are wired north of the neck, and isn't ever going to go away as long as humans are free. And that is too high of a price to pay... And as we travel into space, the concept of militaries will follow. It is inevitiable.

When ever you change the banking rule so you take money out of the physical economy or eliminate the development of the physical economy and one of those projects being the NASA projects and for generating paper wealth in a paper economy instead.

When you take half of the NASA budget away from them where they have to start canceling projects like the Orion.

When they eliminated the tax credit for business that both used the new technology from NASA and provided hardware to NASA which made doing business more affordable.

Then, "YES, IT ABSOLUTLY DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE AS TO WHAT NASA CAN AND CAN'T DO"!

Don't take my word that is what happened, but go check it out and see if that what happened for yourself.

But, in answer to your question I'm I a Lyndon LaRouche person?

Well,Yes!

As a matter of fact I am!

And just for the sake of the argument, he was Democratic Candidate and he supports the space program and technological development. He call NASA a science driver and it works by picking some major project in space that you want to accomplish like Kennedy Moon Mission. When you do something like this, you create jobs and get a technological bust in the physical economy. But, he going to a bigger project to accomplish as the U.S. National Mission. Like build a city on Mars as his science driver. It will both create more jobs than the Kennedy Moon Mission project and get a bigger technological bust for the physical output of goods and service, because it a bigger projects than Kennedy’s project was.

That were I got the idea to build a City on Mars in 40 years time frame. Which is one of the major projects that he pushing. The other major projects are super trains, subway, NAWAPA, nuclear power plants, develop fusion power plants, etc.

If your interested in what he wants to do in space, here a few web links for you.

http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2 … ...eat.pdf

Of course if your not interested in his view on what we should do in space, then forget it.

Larry,

deagleninja · 2004-08-15 14:39:36

If I'm misunderstanding, then please disregard the following statements. Nationalism, at least in the form of local bragging rights and pride will never go away. However, if you mean that countrys have been and always will be, I totally disagree.

From a historical perspective, there are fewer nations today than at anytime in history. The path of progress brings peoples and nations together, not apart.

Technology makes once impassable barriers no more than speed bumps. I also believe that technology will help solve problems with our 'natural' anger and primitive nature.

War and violence won't always be with us either. War and violence are counter-productive to any society.

And I really think the big picture is that what we call human today won't be the status quo in the next hundred years. It is impossible to predict what humans will be like after just 100 years. I think people will look very much the same as they do now, with only a few exceptions, but their minds will be as alien to us as people from 1000 years ago are to us.

Martian Republic · 2004-08-15 16:14:44

If I'm misunderstanding, then please disregard the following statements. Nationalism, at least in the form of local bragging rights and pride will never go away. However, if you mean that countrys have been and always will be, I totally disagree.
From a historical perspective, there are fewer nations today than at anytime in history. The path of progress brings peoples and nations together, not apart.
Technology makes once impassable barriers no more than speed bumps. I also believe that technology will help solve problems with our 'natural' anger and primitive nature.
War and violence won't always be with us either. War and violence are counter-productive to any society.
And I really think the big picture is that what we call human today won't be the status quo in the next hundred years. It is impossible to predict what humans will be like after just 100 years. I think people will look very much the same as they do now, with only a few exceptions, but their minds will be as alien to us as people from 1000 years ago are to us.

I'm not sure who your addressing, but since I was the first one to bring it up. I will give you my definition of what I mean by government or nation state. We are not just dealing with Nationalism here, we ultimately have to go back to two world view of who we are as a race and what our purpose is. Now out of that comes two basic concept of who we are and the types of governments and banking system that we create.

Of the one type of government which is basically Imperialism or oppression of one form of other people is generally based on the concept of man being just an animal and so is expendable by the ruling class. It the dehumanization of man as sovereign individual into just thinking he an evolved ape. But, if that were so, then planet earth could only support 10 to 20 million humans on it, because we would not have the ability to exceed the load limit. Also if your the strongest nation, you have the right to plunder other nation and people of the world too.

Now I believe in the Nation State as a sovereign entity for governing not only in America, but that the rest of the world should also be treated as sovereign nation states too, as a point of dealing with other nation on an equal basses. Now I believe in a sovereign individual that band together for a common good to promote that common good for all or a common wealth or general good. So I support a Constitutional Republic that promote the General Welfare of the American People and is also sovereign over it own money system and also promotes technology to improve the life of the American people and make more productive and prosperous. But, that there needs to be checks and balances to keep our President from acting like King George the III of Great Britain. I believe that America should be an example to other nations as something that they want to emulate and follow as an example of how to rule and what George Bush is doing right now. I believe that the United State was not only created to benefit the American people, but also to promote the good of other nation also. I believe that if American learn how to think Americans, that they will go back to nation state building inside the United States and help the rest of the world rebuild there nation also. But, people like Ben Franklin who gave the inspiration for the U.S. Constitution even though Jefferson wrote it, it was Ben Franklin that proof read it and made correction. Ben Franklin was always looking to the new frontier of technology whether it electricity on Key or engineering other invention. America is a country that is suppose to push boundary back and open new doors of technology and improve life for both American and the rest of the world too. Space is just the next frontier or boundary to cross and American is one of the few country that can give the leadership to cross that boundary too if it will goes back to what it suppose to be and it real mission.

I propose that we colonize the moon and mars as sovereign nations working together for the common good of all humanity. Whether we declare those city open to local control and anybody can come and go as they please from all the different country or some thing else, OK. But, having non-governmental control by neither the country sending the people to either the moon or mars nor by the people that go to the moon, will not work and the people who are making the discussion are accountable to no one. It a sneaky way of getting around the government and putting it some one that not elected by the people to take control over them and make the rules. You are giving some absolute authority over you to make the rules, who doesn’t have to represent you and won’t either. I don't like the British Empire and I'm not interested in going through the back door to setup that system either down here or one either the moon or mars. Which is basically what you will whined up doing both down here and up there too.

But, I would build a city on Mars for no other reason than to put an end to the Imperial mindset and private central banking system once and for all.

And I would do for the express purpose of showing the benifit of the American Economic system as compared to a British Capitalistic free trade, free enterprise or a communal system or socialism.

Larry,

ANTIcarrot. · 2004-08-15 17:18:33

But, as far as to why the space does not seen to be sustainable, we should look at NASA history of who affected it. You would have to follow what Kennedy did and what Wall Street did along with the Federal Reserve System and the banking system.

I believe the costs of the Vietnam war also had something to do with it. Strange that the US government claims it couldn't afford a peaceful space programme, but could afford to start a war with a country that was asking America for help.

Of course now we're in a similar situation, with another somewhat mismanaged war, and another space programme. Though in this case the space programme is just starting, and is somewhat mismanaged as well.

Gee, I wonder where the money's going to go this time?

ANTIcarrot.

comstar03 · 2004-08-15 17:40:56

What I am meaning,

The Earth is divided in nation states that have their own national interests, sometimes they conflict with each other, But space shouldn't have conflicts, that is where humanity should be as one.

Just like the G8 ( or G9), and the security council and other councils that represent the world nations, we need the United Earth Space Council, ( UESC ) that govern human activity outside the earth. That launching humans into space falls within its terms of cotrol, outside the control of a single nation on earth. This would allow us to expand into space, together and the benefits received for the whole world.

Even we gathering the world together we can do anything , divided we will only go so far. Space is a place that we do need the combined talents, resources and commitment of all people of earth.

Martian Republic · 2004-08-15 18:40:53

But, as far as to why the space does not seen to be sustainable, we should look at NASA history of who affected it. You would have to follow what Kennedy did and what Wall Street did along with the Federal Reserve System and the banking system.
I believe the costs of the Vietnam war also had something to do with it. Strange that the US government claims it couldn't afford a peaceful space programme, but could afford to start a war with a country that was asking America for help.
Of course now we're in a similar situation, with another somewhat mismanaged war, and another space programme. Though in this case the space programme is just starting, and is somewhat mismanaged as well.
Gee, I wonder where the money's going to go this time?
ANTIcarrot.

And that exactly my point! You hit the problem right on the head as to what happened to the space program or at least part of the problem anyway.

It was Kennedy that Lunar Mission and opened up the use for peaceful use of nuclear power. It was intended as a science driver for developing new technologies, for creating new jobs and give America a National Goal that would unite the American people in an exciting new adventure that the rest of the world could participate in. This was a wonderful thing to experience and to see happen.

The people that arranged for Kennedy assignation from inside the U.S. Government, then made a counter strike against everything that Kennedy was trying to do. Starting the Viet Nam war was part of that counter strike to pull America in the opposite direction and to humiliate it

This Iraq war is a lost cause and we should withdraw from this disaster as soon as possible and again return to rebuilding American and re-energizing NASA for a new National Goal for space like Kennedy did.

Larry,
.

comstar03 · 2004-08-15 20:07:27

Martian Republic,

Sorry, I don't think so, In the political climate of today, it would be better for earth if we co-operated together instead have another space race, because this time, its not for bragging rights, its for the future of humanity in space. Just like in the opening ceromony of the Games in Athens came live from ISS, that shows team work, and peaceful development for nations of the earth. It won't happen if we don't put aside the nationalism approach in outer space but combine it into a globalism for humanity in space.

Martian Republic · 2004-08-15 20:42:04

Martian Republic,
Sorry, I don't think so, In the political climate of today, it would be better for earth if we co-operated together instead have another space race, because this time, its not for bragging rights, its for the future of humanity in space. Just like in the opening ceromony of the Games in Athens came live from ISS, that shows team work, and peaceful development for nations of the earth. It won't happen if we don't put aside the nationalism approach in outer space but combine it into a globalism for humanity in space.

I'm not going to waste my time arguing against you ignorance of the facts of what really going on. But, the same people that are pushing Globlization or World Government controlled by themselves are the same ones that pulled the plug on NASA and also brought the U.S. Economy down so those project became too expensive to continue. All you will whined up doing is elimination the sovereign nation state and hand the power over to them on a silver platter to do as they see fit and they will do it too.

But, as to a new space race.

John F. Kennedy made the offer to go to the moon with the Russian and they refused his offer. So we went to the moon by ourselves. But, about three years into the project of going to the moon, the Russians said, I think U.S. intend to go to the moon.

I would make another open invitation to go back to the moon to any nation that is interested going. Those that want to go with us to the moon, can go with us to the moon and those that don't want to go with us to the moon, can stay home.

If some nation want to race us instead.

OK, they can do that too if they want to.

It personally make no difference to me.

But, surrendering the sovereignty of the United States is not on my list of things to do on any level.

Larry,

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2004-08-11 09:48:29

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

#2 2004-08-12 07:10:25

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

#3 2004-08-12 07:26:07

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

#4 2004-08-14 00:39:51

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

#5 2004-08-14 10:01:41

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

#6 2004-08-14 11:20:19

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

#7 2004-08-14 14:55:28

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

#8 2004-08-14 19:07:23

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

#9 2004-08-14 21:43:38

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

#10 2004-08-14 21:54:04

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

#11 2004-08-14 21:57:13

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

#12 2004-08-14 22:01:03

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

#13 2004-08-15 00:14:50

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

#14 2004-08-15 01:11:03

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

#15 2004-08-15 05:19:38

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

#16 2004-08-15 07:48:16

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

#17 2004-08-15 11:23:37

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

#18 2004-08-15 12:45:39

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

#19 2004-08-15 14:39:36

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

#20 2004-08-15 16:14:44

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

#21 2004-08-15 17:18:33

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

#22 2004-08-15 17:40:56

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

#23 2004-08-15 18:40:53

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

#24 2004-08-15 20:07:27

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

#25 2004-08-15 20:42:04

Re: Opening space to Individual or private industry - Space CHASE Act

Board footer