New Mars Forums

That pic of Chirac is priceless. 

He's right though, sanctions didn't work with Saddam, and they won't work here.

That anyone on the planet still thinks we can talk Iran out of building a nuke is really, really, pathetic.

The time for good options ended in 1979.

That line was uttered well before Iraq, so applying it to the Axis of Weasels really doesn't make much sense.

Each side of the Atlantic has a very different idea of how to fight the War on Terror, but the Europeans are fighting it. Take Afganistan for example, the forgotten backwater that serves to distract terrorists from focusing on Pakistan and its nukes. But NATO forces are slaughtering Taliban Rebels wholesale.

On Iraq, I think continental Europe has a problem understanding that brutal dictators like Saddam are just as much a part of the problem as Osama. They view the spread of extremist Islam, and the despots, both secular and theocratic, under which it grows to be an annoying rash that can be treated with kind words and welfare checks, instead of the lethal canser that it is that needs to be confronted. I really don't think France was all that attached to Saddam, they just lack the means to contribute to the kind of military opperation required. With no glory to be had, they had no reason risk attaching themselves to what turned out to be a protracted battle over the hearts and minds of Iraqis between the West and the terrorists. In order to be relevent at all, which pride requires, they had to be contrary. Eastern Europe one the other hand had no delusions that they would suddenly be counted among the great powers of Europe, and did what they could on principle, and maybe a little because the French were annoyed at them in general. If Saddam had died, and his regime crumbled on its own, I have no doubt that France, Germany, or even Russia would contribute to a peacekeeping force to deal with the situation we're dealing with now. But after the diplomatic hissy fit they threw, they can't turn back without eating some major humble pie, something pride won't let them do.

Europe needs to puts its history in its past and readjust to the 21st century. This isn't the Cold War were even their best efforts would be little more than speed bumps to the Soviets without our help. They can play vital role against this enemy, if only they would cease being afraid of their own shadow. Utlimately, thats why they are not overly fond of our foriegn policy, its not handicapped by fear.

They might just be able to pull this off.

While I have serious questions on the worth of the ISS, I do think failure to complete it will be far more costly than success.

You'll be glad to know that in the 2620 the name will be changed to get rid of that stupid joke once and for all.

The new name: Urectum. 

True. We've never done an orbital insertion on a binary planet before.

I'll feel better once a post-Pluto target is picked. They haven't said much about it yet cause its still at least a decade away.

Yeah, we had to invent some boogy men so we had some infidels to kill.

Why is it so hard to believe there actually are bad people out there? And I don't mean the stiff suit wearing white Christian men who try and take away your pot.

Actually, that was harsh. But if you can use sterotypes, so can I.

You can learn a lot about your enemy by the company they keep. Take Osamas host, the Taliban. They banned everything they thought "too Western" because it might expose the people to something other than Islam. One of Osamas lifelong goals is to overthrow the House of Saud, the Royal family of Saudi Arabia. Why? Because when Saddam invaded Kuwait in 91, and threatened the Kingdom, his own flesh and blood turned to the West to save them, instead of his fighters who a few years before drove the Soviets out of Afganistan. All this crap, because some people who happened to not be Muslims saved his country from yet one more Arab madman. In Iran it's the same shiite, different country. The Shah was too western. Granted he was also a tad bit tyranical, and we backed him to combat the Russians. But you can hardly say the Iranian Revolution was launched to free the Iranian people. I could list offnearly every majority Muslim country, and they all have major issues with religious authorities trying to violently purge everything that introduces anything not uttered by a mullah. And even Europe is having issues  with its minority populations.

And no, this problem did not start with Isreal. Believe it or not, Isreal has a 20% Arab Muslim population that lives with all the rights, freedoms and respondsibilies as the Jews.

Its quite simple. In the west, religion is between the individual and the Big Man upstairs, or downstairs, or nowhere. You have complete control of your spiritual destiny. In Muslim countries, religious authorities rule life, either socially, culturally, govermentally, or all of the above. Instead of freedom of religion, its freedom from sin. And there is only one reason for it, to perserve the power of those religious authoritys. And yes, extremists in all religions have done that in the past, and continue to try to do that, in every country, but most of them don't resort to mass murder anymore.

Now, most of the world seems more than willing to let that slide as long as they get their oil. Only that isn't working anymore. They seem to think that disengagement will keep them happy. But if it isn't Western oil workers "sinning up the place", it will be Isreal. If it isn't Isreal, it will be Darfur, or Kashmire, or Indonesia, Chechnya, or Bosnia, or the streets of Paris. The only way it will end is if we prove to them that they can not make themselves free from sin by blowing themselves up next to it. And the good news is most Muslims don't actually believe that. But far to many do. And it doesn't take many to make a big mess of things.

Ok, lets say, for the sake of argument, the US tried to buy launches from other countries. What do you think will happen to the price?

If your looking for hints, see what the Russians are charging for ISS crew transfers.

In such a PC society, you can bet the lawyers will be all over this. We'll have to call them "Little People Planets". 

They wanted to imply size, they could have solved the whole thing by setting a diameter requirement to be a planet. 750km for example.

Half the time, you can't get agencies within goverments to properly colaborate. What makes anyone think a project requiring multiple agencies of mulitiple goverments to colaborate would not have crippling problems? Particularly when all parties, within and between goverments, are required to dance the contradictory dance of both looking out for #1 and stroking everyone elses ego.

The only reason we've gotten this far on the ISS is because of the overwhelming inertial force of the US Congress. No other country has the combination of resources and will to do anything on their own.

Future international projects require 1 leader to set the technical standards and provide the core hardware and support. And a suitable launcher. Partners can provide supplementary, compatable hardware as long as they can launch it.

It definately adds a wrinkle.

It requires a combination of the lunar landing technology and surface ops, with the Mars transit technology. And since we basically have to do things in that order, it almost makes it a juicier target than Mars. Literally.

If we can harvest even a small amount of rocket fuel on the moon, that same technology can reap a massive crop on Ceres. And if we can transport it across interplanetary space, it with have an astronomical impact on space travel.

Kinda makes you wonder why it wasn't taken seriously before. It could really get the ball rolling.

Are you being intentionally ironic? 

I certainly hope so. It would cut a decade off moon base development. And we'd get enough volume to do something useful.