XPost: alt.comp.os.windows-11   
   From: alittlespam@arandommailserver.tk   
      
   On 12/12/2025 8:50:29 AM, "J. P. Gilliver" wrote:   
   > On 2025/12/11 17:4:19, v55 wrote:   
   >   
   > [excellent text deleted]   
   >   
   >> Kaku is correct that a manned moon shot *is* a hard problem, and an exp   
   > ensive   
   >> endeavour, which is why it's only been a very small number of nations t   
   > hat   
   >> have gotten *anything* on the moon (Russia, China, India, Japan, Luxemb   
   > ourg,   
   >> UAE, Israel, EU), and even fewer that have accomplished a soft-landing   
   > (US,   
   >   
   > 1. I don't remember a Luxembourg space programme - certainly not getting   
   > to the moon.   
   > 2. The EU is not (yet?) a nation, though the nations comprising it (plus   
   > some others - I think UK still has involvement, both financial and   
   > technical, though not part of the EU, in ESA) have created a fairly   
   > successful association.   
      
   I was surprised to see Luxembourg on the list when I looked it up in research   
   for my comment; here's a citation:   
   https://luxembourg.public.lu/en/invest/key-sectors/luxembourg-ar   
   emis-mission.html   
      
   It seems that it was more of a "joint effort" sort of deal; the article seems   
   a bit unclear as to whether Japan did the launch and Luxembourg just gave   
   them some payload to include, or if Japan performed their launch from a   
   Luxembourg launch site...or something to that effect...but it does seem that   
   Luxembourg-sourced equipment is on the moon somewhere.   
      
   In terms of the EU...pedantry accepted, but it is maximum pedantry. Had I   
   said "The ESA", you would have argued that the ESA isn't a country either.   
   The point I was making was very obviously that the EU, as a government   
   entity, has equipment on the moon. That the EU it is not a country is   
   completely tangential to what was being stated, namely that it is the sort of   
   expense that only a government-sized entity can perform, and that governments   
   do not have the political will to spend that kind of money on a manned moon   
   landing when there are other, more pressing matters.   
      
   I'd love to see Bezos spend a third of his personal wealth on it, though.   
      
   >   
   > []   
   >> So, while Professor Kaku has some understandable concerns about the ext   
   > reme   
   >> difficulties involved with doing a manned lunar landing...the baseline,   
   >   
   >> fundamental question that Kaku *must* contend with, is that no nation,   
   > friend   
   >> or foe, ever came forward to claim the lunar landing was faked. "But it   
   > was   
   >> hard"...yes, but the Russians agreed it happened. "But the computers we   
   > re   
   >> slow!" ...yes, but the Austrailians agreed it happened. "But there was   
   > a lot   
   >> of radiation!" ...yes, but the Japanese agreed it happened. The claim t   
   > hat it   
   >> was faked must account for the tens of thousands of people who would al   
   > l have   
   >> to be lying to cover up America's secret, including America's enemies a   
   > t the   
   >> time.   
   >   
   > Indeed. Though the film (Caprcorn One, I think it was called) was fun at   
   > the time.   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)