In article ,
Rand Simberg wrote:
as if Hubble doesn't [have international partnerships]?
Hubble doesn't. Not any with whom we have treaty-level commitments.

These so-called treaty-level commitments with the space station aren't
actual treaties. And even if they were treaties, the Bush administration,
for one, hasn't been shy to renegotiate treaties that it doesn't like,
or even pull out of them. This is really a lot of political glad-handing.
That it's international or even treaty level doesn't make it any better.
The fact that the space station is supported at the treaty level is part
of what makes it a white elephant.

At the genuine level - as opposed to the treaty level - the Hubble
Space Telescope is indeed an international project. Scientists from
all over the world use it. That includes many scientists in the very
countries that are entangled in the space station. While politicians
may still congratulate each other over space station cooperation,
O'Keefe's treatment of Hubble is an international setback in the view
of both scientists and ordinary people.

--
/\ Greg Kuperberg (UC Davis)
/ \
\ / Visit the Math ArXiv Front at http://front.math.ucdavis.edu/
\/ * All the math that's fit to e-print *