View Single Post
  #18  
Old December 20th 16, 05:13 PM posted to sci.space.history
Dean Markley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 515
Default The Space Race was about Power Projection - Miles O'Brien

On Tuesday, December 20, 2016 at 9:45:01 AM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:
On Saturday, December 10, 2016 at 6:56:54 AM UTC-5, Stuf4 wrote:
I've been explaining this for the better part of two decades here on this forum. Well in the wake of John Glenn's death, Miles O'Brien was on PBS News Hour and explains:

"You know, when you think of NASA and what the space program is all about, it was, you know, kind of a Cold War projection of soft power of the United States." - Miles O'Brien

PBS NewsHour full episode Dec. 8, 2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSA7B-owfw8&t=49m28s


So he hasn't come fully on board, because for whatever reason he felt the need to invent this term "soft power", which I've never heard when referring to nuclear ICBM boosters.


After the many years of continual incredulity here on this forum, it is quite satisfying to see these corrections to history becoming mainstream. Now if we can only convince OK GO to stop using the term "zero gravity"!
One of John Glenn's classic quotes was "Zero-g, and I feel fine."


I expect that even after hearing Miles O'Brien explaining what the Space Race was about, they will still choose to reject this info. So for anyone not wanting to hear about it from a reporter, you can hear John Glenn himself explain it:

"...people forget what much of the impetus was for the astronaut program back in those days..." - John Glenn

That quote is from he
Remembering John Glenn - WCMH, Central Ohio
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTT1AmnCnnk&t=2m52s


The bizarre thing is to know that the group of people who vehemently reject this plainly clear understanding include some of the most highly reputed space historians, like Mike Cassutt. In the times that I have met authors Andrew Chaikin, Sy Liebergot and Jim Oberg face-to-face, I have tried to persuade them to this understanding, to no avail. I did not tell them how they know me from this forum, because of the standards maintained here are so low. But in one speech I attended, I was quite surprised to hear him tell the audience about me, and how he rejected my points on his most famous mission.

It appears that it will take a fresh new generation of authors before these gross errors of understanding will finally be corrected. As it is said with the progress in the field of science, it is clear that it also holds true in the field of space history that advancements are made one funeral at a time.

...and I'm not talking about funerals of people like John Glenn. He had a solid understanding of what he was doing and why. Frank Borman is another astronaut who has a clear understanding of history. The brutal irony is to know that if either of these veteran astronauts had come to this forum and posted under a pseudonym, they would have been responded to with waves of vehemently abusive members here.

Well those members, the most negative of the lot, have been dying off as well. Perhaps there is hope for this forum? Who knows what the future of Usenet will become. It sure seems to be on life support in its current state.

But Phoenixes have been known to rise. And that is what Wally wanted as his Apollo callsign. So in that spirit, I will sign off here with the hope that the level of wisdom amongst space historians will rise as well in the coming decades. There have been many signs in recent years that this indeed has been happening. Miles O'Brien's statement is the latest example.

~ CT


well our military forced nasa to design the shuttle with a very large cross range ability


Yes and that was for reconnaisance, not dropping nukes.