The idea of a permanent presence for human beings on the moon is an important next step to colonizing the far reaches of our ‘cosmic backyard’ and in attempting to overcome the difficulties in establishing a base on Luna we will certainly advance our knowledge in spreading further out onto other planets in our solar system as well. Let us not forget that the spinoffs from the original Apollo program gave us innumerable advances in medical, engineering and computer sciences that probably account for better than a third of our current GDP. Unfortunately it is not the right time, economically at least, for such a grandiose undertaking and while there are endless possibilities to harvest the moon for humankind those technologies that would benefit most are still in their infancies and will not be able to properly monetize the advantages of a moon base for a decade or more. At this point in time, with such a large portion of the American electorate struggling to make ends meet, Newt’s plan is a noble, even vital endeavour whose time has not yet come.

Still, many of us would like to believe we still had it in us to dare to attempt such an undertaking so let us not lull ourselves into believing that this grand venture belongs only to our children’s children.

Although I agree with many people here that the colonization of the moon should not only be a singularly American venture it become obvious that we need to rekindle the flame of our national imagination in believing that we can regain and even surpass the accomplishments of previous generations. And surpass them we must if the human race is ever to leave the “surly bonds of Earth” and make our way out amongst the stars. It will take dedication and sacrifice and a lot of sweat but no than we can afford.

The future does not belong to the Meek.

First off, exploring space is a good thing to do. I think a case can be made that it is vital to do. A lot can be done with robots, but eventually humans must get out there as well. I have a question for who anyone thinks that robots can always do a better job: Why don’t we pull our people out of Antarctica and use robots exclusively down there?

Second, building a base on the Moon is technically feasible, meaning that we have in hand, or could quickly develop, the technology to do it. Even Gingrich’s grandiose idea for a lunar base is technically feasible. But Gingrich’s proposal is not politically or economically feasible — unlike more modest plans like the one Clark S. Lindsey mentions above.

Third, there are several reasons to set up a lunar base. There is still a great deal we don’t know scientifically about the Moon. Also, it could support other science research. The prime example is a radio observatory on the far side, shielded from Earth’s interference. (This could be robotic, with periodic visits by maintenance crews.) And the Moon is a good launch point for missions throughout the Solar System. To save costs, these could make use of lunar materials — including, quite probably, hydrogen and oxygen obtained from water at the poles to use as rocket fuel.

Which is why the answer is, and always has been, staring at us in the face. The religious might say this is God’s will of making us see sense. Intenational co-operation, for humanity’s advancement. If space exploration has a future, then all of humankind must pool resources together. Space is not about nations, it is a global – human – endeavour.

The space shuttle program didn’t have nearly as high a standard for safety, as evidenced by the catastrophic failures of the Challenger and Columbia orbiters.