This post by Mark Whittington prompts me to clarify my position. I don’t think that the Chinese space program is flawed because it is simply a copy of Russian technology (though it is to a large extent), and I’ve never said that. I believe that it’s flawed because it’s a copy of Russian (and, in the 1960s, American) space vehicle philosophy.

They apparently think that the road to the universe lies in putting up capsules on expendable (and intrinsically expensive and unreliable, at least at the flight rates contemplated) launchers. Forty years ago, this was an approach that made sense to win a race to the Moon. In the twenty-first century, it’s a road to frustration and stagnation.

As I wrote last week, a true free-market approach (of which, under the current regime, I suspect they’re incapable) will leave them in the dust. That’s why I don’t even consider them relevant to our species’ future in space, unless they display some dramatic change in approach.

Jim Oberg emails to remind me that today is the fortieth anniversary of Valentina Tereshkova’s flight.

I simply note it now, but I may have something more substantive to say after giving it some thought.

Howard Dean won the Wisconsin straw poll. He got four times as many votes as Kerry, who came in second.

Now, it should be said that straw polls are where activist candidates shine, and Dean probably has the strongest grass-roots support of any of the candidates, including smart use of the web, so this doesn’t necessarily predict his performance in primaries. But still, this isn’t a good omen for them.

If they actually nominate Dean, they won’t have a chance in the general election, and if they nominate someone electable, they’ll anger the base. The Democrat Party is looking down the barrel of a major fissure (to mix a metaphor). The anti-war left is going to be very unhappy with any candidate that supported the war. I think that this could be as bad for them as 1968. Of course, if the economy has recovered by the spring (likely), the Dems may just write off the White House for 2004 and nominate a Dean to make a stand on what they perceive to be principle, and hope that this gets their base out for congressional races.

Protestors in Tehran are being fired upon with automatic weapons, according to Reuters.

I guess whatever gun control Iran has didn’t keep it out of the hands of the pro-mullah thugs.

David Burge (aka Iowahawk) has a compassionate and wistful profile of another dying American industry.

Keep a hankie handy.

Wouldn’t you know, just when I swear off posting for the day, a thought occurs to me. I’ve been hearing this story all morning.

So, we kill four of them when they attack, and we pursue and kill another twenty seven. Nobody tells us if any escaped, which is to me the most important statistic, from a psychological standpoint.

Think about it. The Pali terrorists don’t mind dying if they get to take Jews with them, so it’s hard to dissuade them from their attacks even by killing them. But if every time the Fedayeen attack us in Iraq, they have no survivors, and we sustain no or minimal casualties, rendering the whole thing futile, I’ll bet the attacks will stop pretty quickly. Imagine their state of mind if they send out a squad against the Americans, and none of them return.

It may in fact be possible to dissuade them, even without killing them all. After all, contrary to the conventional wisdom of the media, it’s hope that fuels such attacks, not hopelessness. We have to take away all hope from Saddam’s minions (which will in turn boost the hope of the Iraqi people).

This is a lesson that we have to figure out how to apply to the Israeli situation. Unfortunately, I don’t think the State Department gets it yet.

In case you didn’t notice. I’m doing a lot of stuff around the house today, and I’m not particularly inspired.

I accused John Pike of being a physicist in today’s Fox column. Someone emailed me and asked me on what basis I did this. Doing a quick Google, I couldn’t find any evidence that he has any degrees whatsoever, let alone a physics degree. Does anyone have any information on his CV?

I accused John Pike of being a physicist in today’s Fox column. Someone emailed me and asked me on what basis I did this. Doing a quick Google, I couldn’t find any evidence that he has any degrees whatsoever, let alone a physics degree. Does anyone have any information on his CV?

I accused John Pike of being a physicist in today’s Fox column. Someone emailed me and asked me on what basis I did this. Doing a quick Google, I couldn’t find any evidence that he has any degrees whatsoever, let alone a physics degree. Does anyone have any information on his CV?