DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**CHyLmxDr** · 01-16-2010, 02:34 AM

Moon landings were just another day at the beach then, I guess. Silly me.

But, following the conventional "reasoning", if all that mattered was the first manned mission - popping the proverbial lunar cherry - then why did we send five more manned missions after Apollo 11? Six if you include Apollo 13's failure.

Clearly we'd already proven ourselves the top dogs with the biggest dicks aboard Apollo 11's maiden voyage. Americans were even complaining that the astronauts were interrupting I Love Lucy episodes. The money could've been spent winning the Cold War against Russia, or the simultaneous 'hot' war in Vietnam, or God-only-knows-how-many covert wars at the time. Russians had supposedly scrapped their entire program since they weren't number one. But we decided to send five more manned missions in just three years.

So it very obviously wasn't all about being "first", because we decided we wanted to be first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth!

And yet no country in the 37 years since has wanted to or been capable of being lucky number seven? Think of the marketing opportunities!

01-16-2010, 02:34 AM	#19
CHyLmxDr Join Date Nov 2005 Posts 429 Senior Member	Moon landings were just another day at the beach then, I guess. Silly me. But, following the conventional "reasoning", if all that mattered was the first manned mission - popping the proverbial lunar cherry - then why did we send five more manned missions after Apollo 11? Six if you include Apollo 13's failure. Clearly we'd already proven ourselves the top dogs with the biggest dicks aboard Apollo 11's maiden voyage. Americans were even complaining that the astronauts were interrupting I Love Lucy episodes. The money could've been spent winning the Cold War against Russia, or the simultaneous 'hot' war in Vietnam, or God-only-knows-how-many covert wars at the time. Russians had supposedly scrapped their entire program since they weren't number one. But we decided to send five more manned missions in just three years. So it very obviously wasn't all about being "first", because we decided we wanted to be first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth! And yet no country in the 37 years since has wanted to or been capable of being lucky number seven? Think of the marketing opportunities!
	Quote