personal opinion

--- In ssi_list@... "macrobot118 "
> With all due respect to everyone on this list and the
accomplishments
> and sacrifices of the Russian people and their space program I
must
> disagree with plans to 'internationalize' space exploration.. at
this
> time.
>
> Make no mistake, national pride is one of the strongest reasons
> Americans support NASA. Take that away and you have an expensive
and
> ARCANE endevour that is difficult for the tax payer to comprehend.
> Most people accep that space exploration is expensive and
dangerous
> but are willing to bear the expense because they believe some
great
> good will come of it 'someday'. If they believe that others will
> exploit our efforts and crowd us out, as was done with
electronics,
> the 'why bother' argument has considerable teeth.
>
> I believe a revitalization of NASA is needed but it must be with
new
> American designs that create opportunities for us. Using garage-
sale,
> Russian Cold War hardware does not create a viable space industry
in
> the long run. It only extends the quasi-military aspects for a few
> years more. Unless we find ways to send FEDEX sub-orbitally ("When
it
> has to be their in 15 minutes"), unless United Airlines has a
space
> fleet, unless we create something like Satellites-R-Us, it will
all
> fade away before anyone notices, because no one will care anymore.

I can sympathize with your patriotic feelings but consider that one
of the many reasons the Russians were incorporated into NASA space
efforts was to preclude all of those "rocket scientists" going to
look for work from the Rogue states that want missile technology. If
you cut the Russians loose at a time when the US is trying to put
the WMD genie back in the bottle, I think you may find that North
Korea may evenutally get an ICBM capable of reaching the continental
US, that Iran, which is now mining its own uranium, may develop a
nuclear device and also hiring Russian scientists to develop
missiles.

As for the other countries involved in the ISS, much of their
involvement is for foreign policy reasons and economics rather than
the need for foreign technological expertise.

I'm not sure how you equate a solo space effort with protecting
space-based breakthroughs from competition. The US electronics
manufacturing industry withered because of competitive forces not
because other countries learned how to manufacture electronic
components. They just did it better and cheaper.

In your business examples you cite the providers of a service
(airlines, delivery, satellites) but don't consider the manufacturer
and the increased market that they could sell to it they had a whole
world to sell to. Consider the economic impact of selling 100 sub-
orbital shuttles to a domestic US market compared to 1,500 to a
world-wide market.

I think you need to fill out your argument a little bit more.

TangoMan