I like the old school dogma underlying the whole thing. Russia is bad, private enterprise is good, the US wants to put weapons in space, and Michael Jackson is rocking the world with Thriller.
The article doesn't go into much detail. In this case, Russia is "bad" because of the uncertainty of the relationship relying on something so important to be considered national interests. The decision to develop rockets at home was made around the time when someone in Russia made a comment to the effect of "maybe they should use trampolines to get into space."
This. If this article was about China or Russia doing something to get off a US product or service, HN would be cheering. When the US protects its own interests, especially its world class space programs, suddenly the tone turns towards, "EVIL US NOT PLAYING NICE!" Sadly, that narrative is upvote heaven here on HN.
As far as I can tell, what's upvote heaven is complaining about how nonexistent bad comments get lots of upvotes. I don't see any comments in this thread that meet your description, while the top is mostly comments explaining why this move makes sense. There are quite a few kneejerk "the US is evil" comments, but it's not about playing nice, it's about thinking the US government is the devil and SpaceX is sullied by the association. I don't see any comments saying the US should just keep buying Russian engines.
It's not like they couldn't buy lifts onboard other NATO countries rockets, but I guess the US people don't know there are more than Russia and the US who can send rockets.
Also, this paranoid stance is mildly worrying, because the US is the most weaponized country in the world, and one of the least shy country to use its arsenal, so if it also get a paranoid stance "all the world hate us", then we're all doomed.
>It's not like they couldn't buy lifts onboard other NATO countries rockets
There is no NATO country, other than the US, with a manned space program. We don't live in a universe where the ESA's Hermes spacecraft worked out.
I believe the Ariane 5 was supposed to be man-rated when Hermes was on the table, but going from that to a usable launch vehicle is a lot of time, money, and engineering work we could spend on our own system(s). I have no idea if its possible to retro-fit man-rated safety onto the existing Ariane design.
So 5 years out to Orion/SLS and Dragon/SpaceX or 5 years out to some beat up and already badly aging ESA manned system the American tax payer would be on the hook for, and a system that could never leave LEO. The SLS is designed for non-LEO manned missions like the moon, nearby asteroids, and in its highest configuration - Mars.
Lastly, the ESA was welcome to bid in NASA's COTS program, but decided not to. Maybe take up your beef with them. I imagine they aren't remotely cost competitive.
This certification is about launching unmanned US military payloads, not about manned spaceflight. As far as I know there's no technical reason Ariane 5 couldn't be used for them right now. I don't know why they're not being used, but if the decision to look for a new launch provider happened in the past couple of years then I don't see why you'd go for Arianespace over SpaceX.
Considering Putin is playing politics with space, namely limiting critical RD-180 sales after the west criticized his illegal annexation of parts of Ukraine, as well as funding and arming rebels who are purposely targeting civilians, well, what exactly do you want us to say here? Engage in more mindless political correctness? Sing kumbaya around the campfire as to not offend Russiophile HN'ers?
Putin's Russia is bad. They're dishonest partners and the US should keep its space policy under its national borders for sanity reasons. Look at the early retirement of the ISS. Russia is taking its modules and leaving the project in a few years, again as punishing the west for criticizing their illegal annexations. Previous to this the ISS was thought to be a project with a decade or two of service left.
Also, Putin's mismanagement of his economy means he just cut the Russian space program by a third and what's left is good at flying Soviet-era Soyuz and building Soviet era RD-180's but can't keep post-Soviet Proton-M's from exploding. From a practical stand-point, ignoring everything else, we simply don't need or want their tech now that the RD-180 based rockets are being made redundant/replaced and Orion/Dragon flying astronauts in the next 3 or so years.
the US invaded Iraq, and kill people everywhere in the world on a regular basis too, overthrow governments, helps dictators and lie to people all the time. Nobody gets ahead when you only look for scapegoats and with Manichaeism as a policy.
We are bringing back the world into the 20st century, this will be a big problem.
That's fine, you are very welcome not to buy our rockets, iphones, software, and processors if you want to protest our foreign policy. We're not buying Putin's stuff, so don't buy ours.
I don't see a problem with this.
>overthrow governments
The middle east is migrating to democracy and has the least amount of dictators in charge in my lifetime, thanks to US foreign policy. While I think foriegn policy is hard to judge, annexing land Russia-style for "fuck you" reasons is very different than overthrowing dictators murdering their people and those people begging for US/NATO/UN intervention, which we sometimes provide. The world tried non-interventionism and it got us WWII. Better the US/NATO making these calls than autocratic powers with annexation agendas like China or Russia.
>The middle east is migrating to democracy and has the least amount of dictators in charge in my lifetime, thanks to US foreign policy.
US/Western policy in the region can hardly be described as pro-democracy. We've been propping up dictators and overthrowing democratically elected regimes from Iran in 1953 to Egypt in 2013.
Go read Obama's Cairo speech, do impassioned, if only he believed in his own words.
No, instead we watched a people overthrow a corrupt regime, establish a democracy, and then continued to fund the mitary junta and ignore the country as it becamenobce more a dictatorship which just recently sentenced its former president to death.
Egypt, neighbor to Israel, and the largest secular middle Eastern country by population is too important to the supposed US political interest to allow democracy, especially if that democracy doesn't agree with our policies. It is entirely morally bankrupt, anyone who defends such policy is a warmonger.
>How's that democracy working out in Libya and Syria?
How was India immediately after its colonial rule? Or South Korea after the war?
Its incredible how people conveniently forget how long transition periods are for societies that were previous non-democratic to a democratic one. Ten to fifteen years from now it will be a very different picture. Migrating to a democratic capatalistic economy is an incredible thing. GDP comparision between North and South Korea below:
It was rough for the South Koreans until the 1970s then its been all gravy. They went from war ravage rural wasteland to the most envious economy in about 20 years.
Will it be different in 20 years? Or even 50? Right now these countries are warzones, and the stronger parties seem to be those more willing to pick up weapons and slaughter people.
Life is not a competition towards who has the stupidest, most antagonistic or most isolationist behavior, that's the whole point of discussing in a forum, trying to put ideas in people's head instead of trying to starve them economically or bombing them.
My idea in the initial post was to have people think about one point of view about this deal. In particular because it seem people are mostly from the left here, but there is a real Reaganian aspect to the move.
Are you aware of the extensive US driven sanctions against Russia? We pressured the French to reneg on a hardware contracts with Russia, why would they not return the favor?
If Putin didn't like that, he was more than welcome to end the Crimean occupation and stop shooting children in eastern Ukraine. Again, Putin made space political.
Comparing the US's relationship to Mexico with Putin's relationship to Ukraine is idiotic. Sadly, false equivalence is the typical Russiophile's last defense.
I think he's comparing US's relationship with Ukraine to a hypothetical Russia-Mexico one. I'm not going to be as bold and say "US fostered the Ukranian coup", but I am certain they were very happy about it.
The deposed former president of Ukraine, who happened to be close to Russia, had been democratically elected - his removal most certainly wasn't democratic by any stretch of the imagination. You can tell infer the US's political attitudes if you parse the language of US media / politicians at the time. If they are "protesters" rather than "rioters" or "insurrectionists" - they are friends. I perfectly understand that it furthers US interest to pull out Ukraine from Russia's sphere of influence.
No its not. Regional power and influence is an important concept for sovereign countries. The US is more interested in insuring its neighbors are well behaved than if a country across the Atlantic likes it.
The same is true for Russia, if Russian-Canadian relations are tense that's not as nearly important as whether its neighbor Ukraine is bombing civilians on its border.
America is not exceptional, your argument requires we treat America and Russia with different moral thresholds, that's insane.
Not really. I was born and lived during the dying days of the USSR in 80s (left in mid 90s)
Under communism everyone knew the system was a failure and everything was a sham, hell the jokes being made were hilarious.
Now on the other hand in last few years everything in Russia under Tsar Putin went full retard mode with people actually believing the unashamed propaganda that the state controlled media puts out. Many Russians do not speak anything but Russian and can not afford to leave the country to get a look from outside the box in, this means they buy into the nationalistic bullshit being doled out on tv. People there now actually believe the evil Western boogeyman is out to get them. Which in itself is incredibly scary. Talking to some of my relatives I know understand how some Germans must have felt in the 30s in run up to WW2.
In the 80s the KGB was kept out of politics for most part and the Russian military was there to keep in check any ambitions they had. Now the State was taken over by a mix of KGB / criminal mafia elements and the military had its balls cut off.
Nationalism and borderline fascism is the order of the day 70 years after the war. My grandfather must be spinning in his grave.
Indeed, in late USSR, the power rested on subtle balance between Party, KGB and Army elites. Now the Party has been eliminated, and KGB subjugated the Army.
If you follow the developments of Russian WW2 themed motion pictures you'll notice the corresponding shift. Nearly every movie now features an NKVD or covert ops protagonist. Action TV series are also largely about cloak and dagger types.
This is a little much. Putin has great PR, but the reality is that he's in an ugly position considering the level of corruption he's encouraged and the dismal economy he now leads (2% shrink this quarter alone with many large firms unable for find financing due to sanctions). His foreign policy has only emboldened a previously declining NATO and set strict sanctions on Russia that no one wants to lift. Russians aren't stupid, they know this guy can't deliver the gravy train any longer and just like 1991 caught us by surprise we'll probably see a surprise change of leadership when enough parties are fed up. Putin's move towards a North Korean style government isn't from a position of strength, but a position of weakness. Its a desperate move from a desperate regime.
Now on the other hand in last few years everything in Russia under Tsar Putin went full retard mode with people actually believing the unashamed propaganda that the state controlled media puts out.
Nationalism > Communism
Solidarity with the working man is nothing compared to the integrity of the Russian nation and her borders.
Nationalism and borderline fascism is the order of the day 70 years after the war. My grandfather must be spinning in his grave.
The core of the "Great Patriotic War" was nationalism. No one really fights for an idea. Everyone starts fighting to protect their home, and keeps fighting for the sake of their brothers in arms.
People believe the unashamed media propaganda, few speak anything besides English, many can't afford to leave, people believe the evil east is out to get them. In the 80s the NSA kept out of politics for most part... But now the state is taken over by a miz of NSA and criminal corporate-military-financial entities.
Nationalism and borderline Fascism is the order of the day. We've been at continuous war for over 14 years.
Comments like this depress me. It's like saying a matchstick is the same as a tree because they are both made of wood. Theres no real way to engage with a comment like that.
"The US is no different or infact worse" is a typical argument used to justify various Putinite wrongdoings and deflect discussion. Just go to /r/worldnews for a taste on reddit.
* Russia aggressively annexing its neighbors? Hey look over there at the US and Middle East
* Russia curbing various freedoms and opposition? Sure the US is a 2 party system where there is no hope for change.
* Putin gaining complete control of the media? Sure in the US the media is all run by same companies.
And so on, the best lies are those sprinkled with a small grain of truth as the saying goes...
Except this whole thread exists because an American company, SpaceX, led by a foreign national who chose to become a US citizen, Elon Musk, could create a company that competes directly with government run competitors here and nowhere else.
There are superficial similarities. But any investigation shows real difference.
By contracting with the US military Musk has explicitly joined the military industrial complex, an arrangement akin to Mussolini's corporate-fascism, little different from a nationalized company in practice except there isn't even the facade that profits are shared. Profits are privatized once Musk has sucked off enough public wealth through government by building various machines designed in aid in the killing of people.
Maybe that is just the world we live in, at least except it and stop trying to glorify the killing of women and children for profit.
