Today: Iraq

[Bun-Bun]

1 Exploration of that planet -- can be done better and cheaper with unmanned platforms.

I submit that a properly designed long-term manned mission can equal or exceed the value of an unmanned mission (or set thereof) due to the flexibility and immediacy of a meat-computer on the scene. If it's a plant-the-flag-and-take-a-picture-bye-bye mission, it's much more efficient to send unmanned missions.

Not that I trust NASA to put together a properly designed mission or Congress to fund it. I can see a plant-the-flag mission as a prelude to a really valuable scientific mission, but I'd bet on the latter mission being cancelled due to budget concerns. I see that happening with the ISS now.

4 Ability to survive long periods in space -- that's the function of the space station. And of Mir before that and of Skylab before that.

How about the ability to survive long periods in space without a Soyuz Meals On Wheels truck pulling up every few months? I don't think we've really addressed that one.

I'd also like to add:

5. We would get a more efficient ground-to-orbit lift vehicle. I think that's something that is needed and would pay off in a number of other ways.

To use the space portion of the research budget on a program that does not yield a large amount of information or technology is to waste it.

I see value in a Big Hairy Audacious Goal. It may not be monetary value; it may not even be technological value. It might even be slightly wasteful when viewed in the overall context of the US budget. Nevertheless, it inspires and educates and draws our eyes out past our mean little horizons to better things.

Now, if they strip the NASA budget for unmanned exploration to fund this, I'll bounce right into the chorus of naysayers. We need those programs.