I’m not sure it would start a “cold war in space,” but there are actually better ways to accomplish what Newt wants without treaty withdrawal. It just wouldn’t be an American state. It would be more like the Texas Republic.

We probably agree that a vague proposals for a lunar outpost by the end of the decade isn’t a terribly convincing reason for pulling out of the treaty.

By the way, still betting that you won’t be using deutschemarks soon?

Yep. If it truly does come to that, I think I’d rather switch to using US$. Actually I might do that anyway if the opportunity arises.

It’s either that, or southern Europe is back to drachmas and the lira.

Now that’s a different and somewhat more likely possibility, although no less unpleasant. It all depends on wether our leaders show some spine, which unfortunately is unlikely with people like Merkel, Cameron and Sarko in charge.
Luckily elections aren’t terribly far off, Merkel’s coalition may not even last its full term.

[the usual bunch of mindless blather]

For someone who narcissistically and pseudonymously refers to itself as “this writer,” you sure don’t know much about paragraphs.

“Whoa … back the truck up. I was mearly answering a question. How does he think he can do it. All I did was provide his words on how he plans to do it.”

Sorry for the truck I may have overreacted a little after reading email that we cannot, should not dare criticize Gingrich for whatever reason. Only trying to instill a little reality in whatever candidate Gingrich is saying to some people in Florida to gain their support…

“I do actually take it at face value on how Gingrich would try to do it. Newt can’t help being Newt and if he ever did become president he would either be some sort of manchurian candidate and do a 180 degree about face or he would do what he did as speaker. Try and bully everyone to his point of view and take it to the public. He went against Reagan in the 80′s as E. Abrams wrote about today and was always public about it.”

Well he might but he would be the President and I suspect it may affect him a lot more than he even thinks.

“I have not seen any actual numbers from Gingrich other that 10% of the NASA budget. I have not formed any opinions until I see some of the devil in the details.”

But the 10% is not realistic. Not like this, not by arm-wrestling it through Congress.

“I like ideas for more commercial space activies and prizes, in general, work for me. But without a lot more blanks filled in it is hard to form an opinion for a Lunar Base in eight years.”

Prizes may become a distraction especially if he aims for such large amount of money. Invite and nurture commercial space to define and build an infrastructure that supports the US government as a start and then…

So you’re refuted you own assertion. That ‘off the shelf’ managment mind set is part of the Apollo managment planning culture. Its in their own history. They discuss it openly. It was smart and pragmatic and cost-effective. Faget relished it. It’s not a ‘claim’ — they had to do it, it’s in their own history. They simply did not re-invent the wheel for Apollo- they made use of existing technologies, modified and adapted what they could and what they didn’t have to solve a problem at hand, they worked around it or created a solution. Nobody said they didn’t create new hardware- as noted in an earlier post mentioning the LRV. And the LRV is an electric car- a battery powered vehicle- a technology born of Edison’s era BTW and 100 years ago there were more electric vans on the streets of Manhattan than you could beleive. Look it up. And the LRV has been compared in sparse pragmatics to an ol’buckboard. Naysayers will tell you they souped up a golf cart, stuck a few rakes, a TV camera and antenna on it and sent it to the moon. If Kennedy had given NASA 30 years instead of a decade, maybe they’d have developed and incorporated newer, more complex or effiricent systems into the designs for hardware and collateral systems, but they didn’t have that luxury. Frankly, they did a fine job w/what was on hand at the time.

“actually did after I posted. So what? Do you take this at face value? I believe Gingrich also mentioned something about using political capital. Now for the sake of it, assume he becomes President in 2012. How do you think NASA/HSF will compare with other issues facing this nation? How much capital do you think he will invest in this?”

Whoa … back the truck up. I was mearly answering a question. How does he think he can do it. All I did was provide his words on how he plans to do it.

I do actually take it at face value on how Gingrich would try to do it. Newt can’t help being Newt and if he ever did become president he would either be some sort of manchurian candidate and do a 180 degree about face or he would do what he did as speaker. Try and bully everyone to his point of view and take it to the public. He went against Reagan in the 80’s as E. Abrams wrote about today and was always public about it.

I have not seen any actual numbers from Gingrich other that 10% of the NASA budget. I have not formed any opinions until I see some of the devil in the details.

I like ideas for more commercial space activies and prizes, in general, work for me. But without a lot more blanks filled in it is hard to form an opinion for a Lunar Base in eight years.

Just as one simple answer, everything was off the shelf and already existing as an automobile resembles the lunar rover.

Simply and incredibly and stunningly wrong. I know about the F1, started in 1959. Do you realize that it cost $3 billion dollars in 1962 dollars just for the RL-10?

Read some of the trade journals of the era and then make your claims.

“If you listened to the second event, the business roundtable, at the very end, he addressed this point. You can find that online. He mentions how Reagan did it and would use the same tactic, bypass congress and sell the dream to the general public and force congress to go along.”

I actually did after I posted. So what? Do you take this at face value? I believe Gingrich also mentioned something about using political capital. Now for the sake of it, assume he becomes President in 2012. How do you think NASA/HSF will compare with other issues facing this nation? How much capital do you think he will invest in this?

Again my question. Why would it work for Gingrich? The answer “just because he is Gingrich and has been in Congress for a million years does not count”. Sorry.

“He would have to start selling that during the run up to the election so a vote for him would be that. I don’t think he can sell this though.”

Okay I think you answered my question. Gingrich CANNOT sell this outside a number of space cadets.

Can we get back to serious things now?

This is a monumentally ignorant statement. From “the real doofus in all this talk.”

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/25/gingrich-shoots-for-the-moon/