Bureaucratic Inertia And Holdovers

Insight magazine has an article that may provide some insight into the policy muddle at the Pentagon.

A source close to the Pentagon’s policy office laments, “You have no idea how hard it is to work on the war, find extra hours to develop a forward-looking policy that tracks with the president’s and SECDEF’s [secretary of defense’s] priorities and then try to advance it on the Hill or in the [decision-making] process, and find yourself outmanned by an opposition funded not by the leftist foundations or the congressional-opposition staff budget, but by your own policy shop’s budget.”

Post-Rave Review

Layne found a great article in the Los Angeles New Times about the Yuri’s Night party. I had a Fox column on this subject a week or so before it occured. It gives a good insight into the space-enthusiast/fanatic subculture.

I disagree with one of the space enthusiasts quoted, though.

He’s more than a little disappointed in what has happened to space exploration in the years since the heady days of Apollo. NASA, he says, fumbled the opportunity to make it an integral part of American life, and economic downturns, fuel crises and wars that rocked the home front took the attention away, maybe permanently. “The adventure has passed, in many people’s minds,” Walker says. “But many of us in this aerospace industry recognized that this phase would come, that the average citizen wants to see the adventure, the exploration, but the public funding isn’t there.”

He’s wrong. The funding is there, and has been since the end of Apollo. NASA has consistently gotten many billions of taxpayer dollars every year. What’s lacking is not funding, but the will to spend it in a way that would truly open up space. And as long as we continue to look to the government to sate our dreams, we will continue to be disappointed.

And of course, the reporter has to ask the (admitted) obligatory question:

No discussion of space exploration — an inherently risky and expensive proposition — is complete without answering the “why” question. And it can be a painful, pointed question. During Shuttleworth’s flight, an interviewer asked how he justified spending $20 million on a space junket when that money could have gone to feeding starving people outside his own back door. His answer — to demonstrate to other Africans that space was within their grasp — must have been cold comfort to many on that famine-ravaged continent who have suffered for so long. Let’s be brutally honest here: None of the Yuri’s Night crew have ever gone to bed starving.

Implicit in this commentary, of course, is the false notion that a) if Mr. Shuttleworth had spent his money in some other way, that those Africans would have been better off, and b) that Africa suffers from a lack of money that’s currently going to space activities, when in fact Africa suffers from malgovernance on a tragic and unimaginable scale.

It comes back to one of my earlier columns, in which I described how unknowledgable most people are of how much money is spent on space, relative to those things that some would have us fund instead. NASA’s annual budget would fund the Department of Health and Human services for just a few days. So, while I wouldn’t advocate this, for reasons stated above, you could double the NASA budget, taking the money from HSS to do it, and the HSS would barely even notice it. Space is not taking money from the mouths of starving kids.

But the real problem is not the amount of money being spent, but how it’s being spent. And with more private players getting involved, that problem is going to be solved soon, regardless of how much or little NASA gets.

Remember

I wonder if Monday will be different than past Memorial Days.

For many people, so many of our national holidays seem to have become bereft of meaning other than an excuse for a three-day weekend and a beer-sodden barbecue. Post September 11, I noticed that November 11 took on a new poignancy. Will Monday do so as well?

A friend of mine once suggested that we take our holidays more seriously, by using the Jewish Sedar as a model. We should actually take time out from the consumption of barley beverages, and roasting of dead animals with sugary sauces, to tell the story of why we have the day off. For instance, for the Fourth of July, he recommended an oral reading of the Declaration of Independence.

These musings are just prelude to a link. Just in time for Memorial Day, Victor Davis Hanson writes an eloquent and personal tale of another time and place, when men were giants.

Think about reading it aloud with your family on Monday (good luck getting through it without choking or tearing up). And let us hope that the present circumstances will not require similar sacrifices on so massive a scale, and that if we do, the present generation will bear them as did our parents’, and grandparents’.

And So It Begins

Glenn points out an article at MSNBC about a group that wants to fence off the Moon from development. They apparently want to use Antarctica as a model. This is in tune with many of the people who think that mankind is too immature to colonize space.

Mr. Smith says Mr. Steiner?s proposal fails to take into consideration how proposed lunar projects such as a solar-power plant designed to help fuel earthly activities could actually help the environment back on the home planet.

Mr. Steiner counters that the same kind of solar plant could be designed to operate in the moon?s orbit, without marring the lunar surface.

Which shows that he doesn’t get it. A major part of the solar power proposal is to utilize lunar resources for the construction. Putting the satellites in orbit might be a good idea for other reasons, but it doesn’t change the need to develop the Moon.

?You know,? he says, ?the moon is a stunningly beautiful place, and it shouldn?t be defiled.?

It’s the ANWR battle writ large–in which they want to close off development of an entire world, and there aren’t even any lunar caribou.

It kind of makes me wish that I were going to the Space Development Conference this weekend, just to see the fireworks when this is proposed to the assembled.

[Update at 5PM PDT]

The Times is covering this story as well.

And I just want to clarify, I don’t want to strip-mine the whole orb.

There are obviously some sites that need to be preserved–the Apollo XI and other Apollo landing sites, impact sites of some of the first Rangers, the Monolith from 2001, the B-17s and V-2 rockets that got lost and ended up there in WW II…

Bush Surrendering?

It’s not just Scott Bell–Andrew Sullivan is worried as well.

He told the German press yesterday that there is no plan to invade on his desk. He said it almost proudly. His military leaders, in a sign of their determination to risk nothing and achieve nothing, are now leaking to the Washington Post that they have all but scotched a serious military option in Iraq.

Well, Andrew, I’ve already pointed out the Clintonian formulation of Bush’s statement. You and I might like him to be more direct, but he didn’t say no plans exist. And consider the possibility that such leaks as are being described are ummmm…disinformation. After all, is it really to our advantage to telegraph our intentions to Saddam? Only if we still hope (futilely, in my opinion) to deter him.

I’m willing to wait for a while longer. And of course, the alternative (that Andrew is justified in his pessimism, and we really aren’t going into Iraq) is too depressing to contemplate…

Biting Commentary about Infinity…and Beyond!