Mars rover decision puts space industry at risk, says Garnea
Newsbot @ Fri Dec 15, 2006 1:46 pm
<strong>Title: </strong> <a href="/link.php?id=17140" target="_blank">Mars rover decision puts space industry at risk, says Garneau</a> (click to view)
<strong>Category:</strong> <a href="/modules.php?name=News_Links&file=category&catid=14" target="_blank">Misc CDN</a>
<strong>Posted By: </strong> <a href="/modules.php?name=Your_Account&op=userinfo&username=WDHIII" target="_blank">WDHIII</a>
<strong>Date: </strong> 2006-12-16 08:43:09
<strong>Canadian</strong>
Scape @ Fri Dec 15, 2006 1:46 pm
Oh the irony.
meaden24 @ Sat Dec 16, 2006 11:05 am
how could any government allow this to happen AGAIN!? haven't we learned our lesson with the arrow?? what is the reasoning behind not supporting this?? government should be about moving forward, not standing still or moving backwards, this just might be the wild card the liberals have been looking for if this decision isn't changed, we should do whatever we can to make sure thing companies (such as NASA) stay in Canada, god it's so frustrating when this shit happens.
sandorski @ Sat Dec 16, 2006 7:57 pm
$1:
how could any government allow this to happen AGAIN!? haven't we learned our lesson with the arrow?? what is the reasoning behind not supporting this?? government should be about moving forward, not standing still or moving backwards, this just might be the wild card the liberals have been looking for if this decision isn't changed, we should do whatever we can to make sure thing companies (such as NASA) stay in Canada, god it's so frustrating when this shit happens.
Yup, pretty much.
Arctic_Menace @ Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:36 pm
I was talking to some of my Conservative friends yesterday, and they say that it may be Harper's way of getting back at NATO for not sending more troops.
If that is indeed the case, then Harper just lost a lot of what little respect I have for him over something so trivial. Not to mention self-damaging...
themasta @ Sat Dec 16, 2006 9:05 pm
Whatever the reason, it had better be a damn good one.
sandorski @ Sat Dec 16, 2006 9:51 pm
Arctic_Menace Arctic_Menace:
I was talking to some of my Conservative friends yesterday, and they say that it may be Harper's way of getting back at NATO for not sending more troops.
If that is indeed the case, then Harper just lost a lot of what little respect I have for him over something so trivial. Not to mention self-damaging...
If that is indeed the case, then Harper just lost a lot of what little respect I have for him over something so trivial. Not to mention self-damaging...
Agreed, that would be the height of stupidity.
Ripcat @ Sun Dec 17, 2006 8:53 am
No comments from the CKA hardcore conservatives?
RUEZ @ Sun Dec 17, 2006 8:57 am
Ripcat Ripcat:
No comments from the CKA hardcore conservatives?
Why? Most people probably don't agree with it or don't care. I disagree with their decision and like I said before people should email the minister responsible if they think it's important.
Tricks @ Sun Dec 17, 2006 9:15 am
Arctic_Menace Arctic_Menace:
If that is indeed the case, then Harper just lost a lot of what little respect I have for him over something so trivial. Not to mention self-damaging...
I agree that's not a good reason, but it is hardly trivial.
Clogeroo @ Sun Dec 17, 2006 9:28 am
Weren’t the French threatening to put tariffs against us because of Kyoto as well? Also not moving up to the frontlines in Afghanistan could be the case too. So if they don't want to help us ou or even hurt our industry we won’t prop up their space agency or even buy those airbus aircrafts they are coming out with there.
Ripcat @ Sun Dec 17, 2006 9:54 am
RUEZ RUEZ:
Ripcat Ripcat:
No comments from the CKA hardcore conservatives?
Why? Most people probably don't agree with it or don't care. I disagree with their decision and like I said before people should email the minister responsible if they think it's important.It's this part from the article: "Bernier rejected the request, saying Ottawa hadn't yet made up its mind about Canada's future role in space."
I thought Harper said he wanted Canada to take a leadership role in the world. In my opinion this includes space exploration so Canada has already made up its mind.
Firecat @ Sun Dec 17, 2006 9:58 am
Clogeroo Clogeroo:
Weren’t the French threatening to put tariffs against us because of Kyoto as well? Also not moving up to the frontlines in Afghanistan could be the case too. So if they don't want to help us ou or even hurt our industry we won’t prop up their space agency or even buy those airbus aircrafts they are coming out with there.
Isn't the ESA the buyer, meaning they're propping up our industry?
I wasn't aware any of our airlines were buying Airbus right now.
Thematic-Device @ Sun Dec 17, 2006 11:06 am
Firecat Firecat:
Isn't the ESA the buyer, meaning they're propping up our industry?
No the ESA offered that Canada scrap all its other CSA projects and work on this, just for them.
This doesn't help Canada's high-tech, its the same amount of money being spent except the lot of you aren't allowing one project to finish before starting a new one.
Firecat @ Sun Dec 17, 2006 11:16 am
Thematic-Device Thematic-Device:
Firecat Firecat:
Isn't the ESA the buyer, meaning they're propping up our industry?
No the ESA offered that Canada scrap all its other CSA projects and work on this, just for them.
This doesn't help Canada's high-tech, its the same amount of money being spent except the lot of you aren't allowing one project to finish before starting a new one.
I certainly didn't get that out of the article.