• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should the US ReCalim the Moon

Should the US Reclaim the moon?

  • Total voters
    21
Our space program should be concentrating on the basics first. Our first priority should be developing a cheaper means of launching payloads into orbit. No matter what kind of space program you want in the future, it would be massively enhanced by having lower costs to get into space in the first place. The second thing should be working on automated control systems and robots in the vein of the mars rover. Not only has all our best scientific data come from robots, but such research also has immensely practical use here on earth as well. Finally, we should start looking about for some sort of commercial application in space. Now granted its too expensive for the near future, but we could still lay the groundwork like surveying for useful materials or examining zero-gee construction techniques.
 
Ikari said:
WTF is so important about the moon? Other than the regulation of our tides? there's no reason to spend the money necessary to get there and there is zero military significance to the moon, and no one country can own the moon.
Click to expand...

Zero military significance to the moon?

And the United States spends billions of dollars on it's ballistic submarine missile programs because...?

Because SSBN's are hard to find, harder to hit.

The moon is a damn hard place to hit. The military potential of the highest ground around can't be overstated.
 
Ikari said:
I'm all for progress. However, there are far greater things to research currently on earth that will have far greater and more immediate impact that space travel. I don't think you people quite understand the price tag which would come with this if we were to seriously pursue space travel. There's not a "payoff" to space travel at this point. And any potential "payoff" there may be is offset by the initialization costs and times and diverting of funds away from other research which is more immediately practical.
Click to expand...

And this is nothing but your opinion. The facts and benefits we have gained from NASA and it's relatively tiny budget fer outweigh the minuses.
 
Let China go to to the moon. They've got all our money, anyway. They can pay us for our technology. That would be one way to get some our money back.
 
Ikari said:
Still not comparable as you're still dealing with terrestrial concerns. While ships and men were fairly expensive, it wave completely possible to finance such an expedition by a singular country. That is not the case for space research. Apples and oranges.
Click to expand...

OF COURSE we can finance lunar exploration by ourselves.

First off, lunar exploration/exploitation is an application of national defense and an extension of the transportation concepts such as "post roads" and hence eminently constitutional. I would not be advocating it otherwise.

Secondly, if the Federal government ceased it's unconstitutional spending on education the nation would have hundreds of billions of dollars to spare on national priorities such as lunar exploitation.

And, it's not going to cost as much as the detractors claim. Space costs too much today because lawyers in Congress design space programs. That's usually not a good plan.
 
USA-1 said:
Let China go to to the moon. They've got all our money, anyway. They can pay us for our technology. That would be one way to get some our money back.
Click to expand...

And when China puts it's missile launchers on the moon, aimed at the US, what then?
 
Blackdog said:
And this is nothing but your opinion. The facts and benefits we have gained from NASA and it's relatively tiny budget fer outweigh the minuses.
Click to expand...

What benifits? Velcro?

NASA is an economic stimulus program. The government creates jobs by setting a goal and then throwing money at it.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
And when China puts it's missile launchers on the moon, aimed at the US, what then?
Click to expand...

Why would they do that? We owe them way too much money to destroy us. They need us alive and healthy.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
There's always economic benefit to claiming real estate before the other naions get it.
Click to expand...

There is? Pretty much every colony during the Age of Exploration was a financial drain on its mother country...and they didn't have to worry about terraforming the Americas.

Furthermore, the moon "real estate" is worthless, and will be for the foreseeable future.

Oh, and you can't truly claim real estate just by sticking a flag in the ground or building a base. If we build a base somewhere on the moon, that leaves plenty of open space on the moon and some other country could easily build elsewhere if they had the desire and ability to do so.

Scarecrow Akhbar said:
And....the moon is essential to the future exploration and hence exploitation of the solar system. Otherwise, all assets have to be hauled up from Earth, expensively.
Click to expand...

And so that necessitates us going there right now (as opposed to a few decades hence)...why?
 
rathi said:
Our space program should be concentrating on the basics first. Our first priority should be developing a cheaper means of launching payloads into orbit. No matter what kind of space program you want in the future, it would be massively enhanced by having lower costs to get into space in the first place. The second thing should be working on automated control systems and robots in the vein of the mars rover. Not only has all our best scientific data come from robots, but such research also has immensely practical use here on earth as well. Finally, we should start looking about for some sort of commercial application in space. Now granted its too expensive for the near future, but we could still lay the groundwork like surveying for useful materials or examining zero-gee construction techniques.
Click to expand...


Establishing military and commercial outposts on the moon ARE the next logical steps.

No point in developing "cheaper launchers" when there's nothing to launch and no place to launch it to.
 
I think going to the moon, at this point in history, is a waste of resources. I'd rather see a government program, on a grand scale like this, researching and developing future sources of fuel for transportation and electricity. The human race also needs to stop growing in numbers, this is another imperative.
 
Kandahar said:
There is? Pretty much every colony during the Age of Exploration was a financial drain on its mother country.
Click to expand...

Natually. Of course.

I wonder why Athens sent out colonies around the Mediterranean? And colonies were so damn bad the British never established any, right?

Kandahar said:
Furthermore, the moon "real estate" is worthless, and will be for the foreseeable future.
Click to expand...

The future is here, now.

LCROSS proved the existence of H20 on the moon.

Kandahar said:
Oh, and you can't truly claim real estate just by sticking a flag in the ground or building a base.
Click to expand...

Really?

I guess the proper way of claiming real estate is to buy it from the natives, right?

Could the US claim the whole damn moon? Nope, not practical. I hope I didn't come across as saying the US should try that. That would make an awful mess. It's not impossible, just very difficult and it would lead to war.

Should the US claim the bits and pieces it can grab and hold onto, like areas with H20 and commercially viable ore deposits? You bet your ass it should.

Kandahar said:
And so that necessitates us going there right now (as opposed to a few decades hence)...why?
Click to expand...

Why?

Because...we're not going there now, we're going there "a few decades hence"....but if that idiot Messiah stops the program, that few decades lost will make the difference and someone else (China) will grab the best real estate for themselves.

Know one of the reasons Germany felt inferior before WWI? France and Britain and the Dutch and Spain were centuries ahead of them and colonized all the good spots. By the late 19th Century, Germany made some forays into Africa, and that was about it. Germany never became a significant world power, and never will.

The US is not a major world power, the US is THE major world power, and it won't stay there unless it's plans ahead and ACTS on those plans.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Well, should the US tolerate this idiot's lead and abandon the most important military and economic asset to the Chinese or anyone?
Click to expand...

In response to your opening remarks. First of all, Obama is not an idiot. Hurling that insult at someone with whom you disagree demeans your argument.

Secondly, we have already been to the moon. From the scientific effort required to accomplish that amazing feat came many breakthroughs, esp in computer technology. It was the process of reaching the goal of setting foot on the moon that brought new discoveries. The moon itself is a lifeless hunk of rock which requires a great deal of energy to reach, with supporting life at a most basic level being very difficult and expensive.

What is valuable to the human race is carbon-based life, not lifeless celestial bodies with no breathable atmosphere.
 
All we have to do to get the US back to the moon is to give Al'Quaeda a surplus rocket. At that point our sense of nationalism will do the rest.
 
Blackdog said:
Where do you come off with this fantasy crap? We already have the technology, we are in th process of perfecting it. The loss of this program will leave us years behind in technology.

You can call it fantasy all you like, that does not make it so.
Click to expand...

So what's the purpose of getting to the moon then? Because I'm pretty sure it's not just to get there. I'm pretty sure people are advocating it as launch of a serious space program wherein we have **** on the moon, maybe even military bases. So you're telling me we already have all that technology? Are you sure you're not living in a fantasy world?
 
MyOwnDrum said:
In response to your opening remarks. First of all, Obama is not an idiot. Hurling that insult at someone with whom you disagree demeans your argument.
Click to expand...

He's cancelling investment into essential national assets.

He's an idiot.

MyOwnDrum said:
Secondly, we have already been to the moon. From the scientific effort required to accomplish that amazing feat came many breakthroughs, esp in computer technology. It was the process of reaching the goal of setting foot on the moon that brought new discoveries. The moon itself is a lifeless hunk of rock which requires a great deal of energy to reach, with supporting life at a most basic level being very difficult and expensive.
Click to expand...

So, you don't have any visions of the future, any concept of what can be done with a dead planet whose soil is made of titanium and aluminum and silicate dusts, and you're really not certain what use to manufacturing access to a solid foundation and a perfect vacuum can be for human technological progress?

Well, a bunch of us are fully aware of the possibilities and the commercial potential for such a place, and many of us are also aware of the military threat presented by allowing potential enemies to establish primacy on the moon, also.

Seriously, the potentials outweigh the costs. What's needed now to exploit the solar system, starting with the moon, is basic engineering applications, not scientific breakthroughs.

MyOwnDrum said:
What is valuable to the human race is carbon-based life, not lifeless celestial bodies with no breathable atmosphere.
Click to expand...

So. Explain how that life is going to be found if we don't get our sorry asses out there looking for it?

What is the first necessary step in getting out there to find alien life?

Oh, that's right, the first necessary step is colonization of and exploitation of a major airless sterile rock orbiting the Earth.
 
Last edited:
Blackdog said:
And this is nothing but your opinion. The facts and benefits we have gained from NASA and it's relatively tiny budget fer outweigh the minuses.
Click to expand...

Mmm, yes. So who's opinion is worth more. Some random guy with no scientific backing thinking of some delusion of grandure over space travel or a scientist? I'm going to say the scientist probably has a lot more experience and knowledge about this.
 
USA-1 said:
Why would they do that? We owe them way too much money to destroy us. They need us alive and healthy.
Click to expand...

Yeah, whatever.

I guess you never carried a gun to your drug deals when you're buying a couple kilos to sell. :roll:

Just kidding, of course, but having the gun always helps the negotiations turn in your favor.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Yeah, whatever.

I guess you never carried a gun to your drug deals when you're buying a couple kilos to sell. :roll:

Just kidding, of course, but having the gun always helps the negotiations turn in your favor.
Click to expand...

China is not our enemy anymore. They are our banker.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Establishing military and commercial outposts on the moon ARE the next logical steps.

No point in developing "cheaper launchers" when there's nothing to launch and no place to launch it to.
Click to expand...

There's no military or commercial viability on the moon. First off, getting **** there is going to be damned expensive. Secondly, supporting life there is going to be damned expensive. There's not enough water, we don't have the tech to set up all the **** we'd need yet, you'd continually have to be receiving shipment from Earth. The moon is a barren dust ball. It's not like you can run up there, throw down a tent, and be all good to go. There's no protective atmosphere, you have to deal with extreme changes in temperature, there's no fertile soil or large source of water so it's impossible to independently support life there. And all for what? Minimal gains at best, when all the money, scientists, and research which would have to go into this could be better utilized elsewhere.

I really don't think some of you think this through.
 
F*** the moon. I'm Rick James bitch!
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Yeah, whatever.

I guess you never carried a gun to your drug deals when you're buying a couple kilos to sell. :roll:

Just kidding, of course, but having the gun always helps the negotiations turn in your favor.
Click to expand...

what happens when everyone has guns? :lol:
 
Ikari said:
So what's the purpose of getting to the moon then?
Click to expand...

1) Claim discovered H2O assets for future use in space exploration and lunar colonization. Beleive it or not, one of the thnings the expanded westward settlement from the coastal colonies was the discovery of salt in Syracuse.

2) Claiming military high ground. Study history, do not discount the value of having a nearly unassailable offensive base to deter potential enemy action.

3) Aluminum, titanium, silicon, oxygen, all to be found in lunar regolith, all essential for space construction. None of it would have to be lifted from the Earth, once the industries are established.

4) Vacuum, a vital manufacturing asset that we can't get enough of on earth.

5) Solar Damn Power.

6) 1/6 Gee.

7) Farside Radio silence. Forever out of sight and sound of earth, an astronomical research treasure.

8) Inspiration for our youth and the end of relying solely on "spaceship Earth".

9) New experiences for art and the expression of the human soul.

10) He3 for fusion research and power.

11) Simple lebensraum.



Ikari said:
Because I'm pretty sure it's not just to get there. I'm pretty sure people are advocating it as launch of a serious space program wherein we have **** on the moon, maybe even military bases. So you're telling me we already have all that technology? Are you sure you're not living in a fantasy world?
Click to expand...

We need to re-build launch technology we foolishly threw away. We need minor research into the biology and stability of closed habitats. But for the most part, we could be on the moon today, if we'd made that our goal in the seventies, and without any drastic technological breakthroughs, using what you see around you today.
 
Last edited:
lol i feel there's bigger fish to fry than settling the moon
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom