As you might have guessed, I have an opinion on this subject. I will address it in two parts:
First: Why aren't other countries vying for space dominance? Simple: Money.
I'm sure the Russians would love to have all this crazy space stuff, but can they afford it? No way in hell.
Edit, found this link:
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milspace-05zc.html
I'm sure the Russians would, if they could, but they don't have a chance, so they'll say they oppose any action in space if they can't be there.
The Chinese? Their just starting off, and I'd say their the US's biggest adversary for the new space race. Their rocket just touched down today I believe with their second manned mission to space going well.
There are perhaps a few other countries with the ability to travel to space, India comes to mind; however, I’m not exactly sure if that is accurate. And even if the Indians had the resources, their much too busy with Pakistan. They both have nukes, and really, that's all their interested in right now.
This leaves the US.
Now for the second part:
Many people don't realize this, but the US has already begun the militarization of Space. If you recall about a year or two ago, (i'm sure Canadians will remember this because it was in the news for basically 6 months while the PM sat on the fence) there was tremendous pressure for Canada to sign onto the missile shield that the US says is designed to shoot down incoming missiles from rogue nations like N Korea.
Canada did not sign on, but many have said, that since we're a part of NATO, we're apart of the missile shield because they are intertwined together now. It doesn't matter if the PM says no to the shield, we have no choice but to play along.
The US has been doing many tests with land based technologies to shoot down incoming missiles, but critics of the program say that this will soon move to near earth orbit. And I would happen to agree. I mean, why wouldn't it? If the US is afraid of rogue missiles, and they can shoot them down from space, why wouldn't they try to implement this technology?
Canada has stated that it is against "Star Wars" and the militarization of space. This is why the US has to be careful about how they describe certain programs.
Next in the US's arsenal is the US Space Command:
http://www.peterson.af.mil/hqafspc/
There was a better link about the program that I can't find at this moment, but you can browse around their site.
More info here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Force_Space_Command
The purpose of bringing this up is to show that the US does infact have programs based on the militarixation of sapce. And again, does this suprise anyone? The most powerful nation, i'm sure this is expected.
[quote:21139] * Space forces support involves launching satellites and other high-value payloads into space using a variety of expendable launch vehicles and operating those satellites once in the medium of space.
* Space control ensures friendly use of space through the conduct of counterspace operations encompassing surveillance, negation, and protection.
* Force enhancement provides weather, communications, intelligence, missile warning, and navigation. Force enhancement is support to the warfighter.
* Force application involves maintaining and operating a rapid response, land-based ICBM force as the Air Force's only on-alert strategic deterrent.
[/quote:21139]
Next is the reason for President Bush returning astronauts to the Moon.
The US has had something like 11 manned missions to the moon with the Apollo Program if I remember correctly. There's nothing there. So why would they want to spend billions and go back? Many would say that the new missions to the moon would have the purpose of setting up military bases and such.
I remember reading an article about a month or two ago where the top Nasa guy O’Keefe I believe said that choosing to build the ISS (international space station) was the wrong idea. He stated that it was obvious now that the US and international partners should have developed a moon base instead of building the ISS in earth orbit.
Here's the article:
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/sp ... view_x.htm
It wasn't O’Keefe, it was Griffin. My mistake.
[quote:21139]Only now is the nation's space program getting back on track, Griffin said. He announced last week that NASA aims to send astronauts back to the moon in 2018 in a spacecraft that would look like the Apollo capsule.[/quote:21139]
President Bush also announced that a manned mission to Mars will also take place. I would expect the same to follow on Mars as what happens on the Moon.
This is all speculation of course. My speculation through the research I have done. Who knows? 2018 is a long way off. Things can change before then. Perhaps the US will never go back to the moon. But in my opinion, I don't see why the US wouldn't want to create a military installation on the Moon. They are the only country with the technology. Funding is a different story though, because the US is pretty much bankrupt. If they can find a way to fund it, I see it happening without a doubt.
I suppose the ESA could also be a contender in this, but I doubt they have the funds to do any of this.
That's how I see it playing out anyway. 2040-2050 the US will have a fully functional military installation on the Moon.
Edit:
Found this link as well:
http://www.afsc.org/pwork/0200/0220.htm
[quote:21139]On Nov. 1, the General Assembly of the United Nations voted to reaffirm the Outer Space Treaty--the fundamental international law that establishes that space should be reserved for peaceful uses.
Almost 140 nations voted for the resolution entitled "Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space." It recognizes "the common interest of all mankind in the exploration and use of outer space for peaceful purposes," reaffirms the will of all states that the exploration and use of outer space "shall be for peaceful purposes and shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interest of all countries," and declares "that prevention of an arms race in outer space would avert a grave danger for international peace and security."
Only two nations declined to support this bill--the United States and Israel. Both abstained.[/quote:21139]
There is TONS of info out there. All you have to do is look for it. That goes for any subject.
And More:
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Penta ... Corps.html
[quote:21139]The blueprint for the U.S. space military program is revealed in the report of the Commission to Assess United States National Security Space Management and Organization. The "Space Commission" was chaired by Donald Rumsfeld, now installed as the Bush-Cheney administration's Secretary of Defense.
"In the coming period," states the report issued January 11, 2001, "the U.S. will conduct operations to, from, in and through space in support of its national interests both on the earth and in space.''
The report urges that the U.S. president "have the option to deploy weapons in space to deter threats to and, if necessary, defend against attacks on U.S. interests."
"We know from history that every medium-air, land and sea-has seen conflict," declares the report. "Reality indicates that space will be no different. Given this virtual certainty, the U.S. must develop the means both to deter and to defend against hostile acts in and from space. This will require superior space capabilities."[/quote:21139]