Print 88 comment(s) - last by sorry dog.. on Apr 24 at 9:29 PM

They will continue maintaining the International Space Station together, though

According to The New York Times, NASA announced yesterday that it is halting many forms of contact with Russian government representatives due to Russia's "ongoing violation of Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity."

Russian and American relations have become a bit strained after Russia annexed Crimea, a Ukrainian peninsula with past ties to Russia. In response, the U.S. has imposed sanctions.

Despite these issues, the two space agencies have managed to maintain a normal relationship. The retirement of the U.S. space shuttle program in 2011 means that the U.S. doesn't have a way to launch astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS), so it depends on Russian Soyuz capsules to get there instead. Russia also benefits because it receives $70 million for every astronaut it launches. 

But it seems even the space agencies have problems now, as NASA has decided to sever many ties with the Russian government -- except when it comes to operating the ISS. 

[SOURCE: Mashable]

"Given Russia's ongoing violation of Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity, NASA is suspending the majority of its ongoing engagements with the Russian Federation," said NASA in a statement. "NASA and Roscosmos will, however, continue to work together to maintain safe and continuous operation of the International Space Station. NASA is laser focused on a plan to return human spaceflight launches to American soil, and end our reliance on Russia to get into space.  

"This has been a top priority of the Obama Administration’s for the past five years, and had our plan been fully funded, we would have returned American human spaceflight launches – and the jobs they support – back to the United States next year. With the reduced level of funding approved by Congress, we’re now looking at launching from U.S. soil in 2017. The choice here is between fully funding the plan to bring space launches back to America or continuing to send millions of dollars to the Russians. It’s that simple. The Obama Administration chooses to invest in America – and we are hopeful that Congress will do the same."

NASA is reportedly suspending travel to Russia, teleconferences, visits by Russian government officials to NASA facilities and even the exchange of emails with Russian officials.

Source: The New York Times

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Sure glad
By FITCamaro on 4/3/2014 8:13:25 AM , Rating: 2
We rely on Russia to get people into space.

RE: Sure glad
By superPC on 4/3/2014 8:27:08 AM , Rating: 2
Well maybe in the future we can rely on China. Perhaps they can do it cheaper than Russia can.

Ideally though SpaceX should handle astronaut transfer to ISS.

RE: Sure glad
By FITCamaro on 4/3/2014 8:49:48 AM , Rating: 2
I'm hoping you're being sarcastic about China.

RE: Sure glad
By ProZach on 4/3/2014 8:44:16 PM , Rating: 3
Well maybe in the future we can rely on China. Perhaps they can do it cheaper than Russia can.

Perhaps, but not as cheap as Mexico can.

RE: Sure glad
By coburn_c on 4/3/2014 8:55:56 AM , Rating: 3
Russia is what got us to send people into space the first go round, it's what drove this country all through the cold war. We pushed our schools, our economy, everything we have had to outshine the communists to prove we were better.. another cold war is exactly what we need to give this country some drive

RE: Sure glad
By FITCamaro on 4/3/2014 9:04:13 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah I'm not going to encourage another 30 years of being basically standing with your finger on the button of world destruction like the Cold War was.

To give this country drive we need to stop encouraging punishing those who succeed. Stop demonizing wealth. Stop rewarding mediocrity. And stop encouraging people not to work.

RE: Sure glad
By tayb on 4/3/2014 10:39:51 AM , Rating: 2
"To give this country drive we need to stop encouraging punishing those who succeed. Stop demonizing wealth. Stop rewarding mediocrity. And stop encouraging people not to work."

We literally do none of those things in the United States. You watch too much Fox News. Open your eyes to the real world. The United States provides more corporate welfare than social welfare and has some of the lowest tax rates for high income earners in the world. We don't provide well for the needy and don't offer affordable health care.

Our current tax rates are some of the lowest in United States history. If we were to dramatically increase tax rates it wouldn't be abnormal it would be normal. What we have right now is abnormal. And yet suggestions to go back to normal US tax rates are met with ridiculous comments like yours about "punishing success." What a crock of shit. The super wealthy in this country have bought and paid for the propaganda that convinced your simple mind that the status quo is good for everyone.

RE: Sure glad
By FITCamaro on 4/3/2014 12:27:03 PM , Rating: 2
Oh really? So the majority of major news outlets out there aren't telling people that anyone who is wealthy (except themselves and their allies of course) is the enemy of the poor and middle class and they all need to be taxed heavily.

So we aren't providing tens of thousands of dollars in government benefits to people who don't work or who have acted irresponsibility and as such, have low paying jobs. We don't have people who are trying to raise the minimum wage to a level that is equal to the pay of starting college graduates, which discourages even going to college. Since why bother when you can make the same wage with just a high school diploma?

How many people do you see who are technically "poor" but somehow they have the money for expensive cell phones, HDTVs, cable, broadband, etc?

Just because tax rates were higher in the past doesn't mean that they SHOULD be higher. That somehow that is the "normal". Why should someone work only to give away half, or more, of what they make just so someone else doesn't have to work as hard. It's pitched as kindness when in reality it just creates enslavement to the government. How are people "free" when they rely on the government for everything in their lives? Food, shelter, health care, education, etc.

And how in the hell do we give more corporate welfare than social? Social Security alone is almost $900 billion dollars. Medicare and Medicaid are $940 billion as well. We still haven't even gotten to food stamps, Section 8 housing, and the myriad of other benefits. Then you have wealth redistribution through tax credits like the Earned Income Credit which can provide up to almost $10,000 to people who never paid it into the system to begin with.

I disagree with corporate welfare as much as anyone. However tax credits that are general and applicable to everyone are not corporate welfare. Only the ones that exist solely for the benefit of a single or a few corporations are and I disagree with those. I disagree with the idea of a company like IBM, who's CEO is one of Obama's best buddies, paying $0 in taxes.

RE: Sure glad
By sgw2n5 on 4/3/2014 5:44:55 PM , Rating: 1
You must have been beaten up on the bus by a poor kid on several occasions? Did a working class person piss in your cheerios when you were little?

RE: Sure glad
By FITCamaro on 4/4/2014 3:18:03 PM , Rating: 4
I was the poor kid.

RE: Sure glad
By Nfarce on 4/3/14, Rating: -1
RE: Sure glad
By sgw2n5 on 4/3/2014 5:36:35 PM , Rating: 1
You need to wipe the spittle off of your monitor. And maybe read a book once in a while or something.

RE: Sure glad
By cruisin3style on 4/3/2014 7:01:32 PM , Rating: 2
you my friend have been watching a little too much Fox News

In the Bush tax cuts, you had a $4 trillion dollar program. $3.2 trillion went to all US workers (legal ones presumably), but on unequal ground. So people making $20k a year got back a much smaller sum than those who make millions or billions a year. But they make more so that is okay, right?

BUT then the last $800 billion was purely for the top ~2% of the time, which was ~$250k when talks first started about killing the Bush tax cuts.

An example I saw in a magazine article was for one of the tippity top richest people, who would have received $100,000 if that bonus top 2% only tax cut was stopped and $600,000 if all of the tax cuts were kept in place.

Seems like we've been encouraging and rewarding those who succeed ever since 2001 or 2003, which i understand is when parts of the tax cuts began iirc

the debate about unemployment and all that is insane when you're throwing $80 billion a year at the richest in the country. you've been spun to death

RE: Sure glad
By Reclaimer77 on 4/3/2014 7:09:59 PM , Rating: 2

Bush created an entire new tax bracket to give the middle class tax relief.

No matter how you slice it, or compare it to the "rich", that's a hell of a good thing. Bush lowered taxes ACROSS THE BOARD for everyone.

the debate about unemployment and all that is insane when you're throwing $80 billion a year at the richest in the country. you've been spun to death

And here is where you Liberals completely and utterly fail.

A tax cut is NOT "giving" people money. It's letting them KEEP more of their own goddamn money.

The Government does NOT own all the money generated in this country. At least, they aren't supposed to.

RE: Sure glad
By cruisin3style on 4/4/2014 7:50:43 AM , Rating: 2
giving, throwing, not collecting from...the syntax or word choices don't change the substance of what i said...i understand perfectly that conservatives balk at terms like "giving" doesn't change the substance of what i said, much as talking to someone whose english isn't perfect doesn't change the story they are trying to tell.

i sliced it the correct way: factually.

it's too bad conservatives don't understand that being unhappy with republican policy doesn't mean you are a liberal. i would vote for paul ryan in 2016 if he looked as good as i think he could be. also must be nice to be right all of the time, if only in your own head.

RE: Sure glad
By atechfan on 4/5/2014 6:03:02 AM , Rating: 2
Of course tax cuts end up saving more money for the rich. They were paying so much more. Hard to save someone money with a tax cut if they are paying little to no taxes to begin with.

RE: Sure glad
By bug77 on 4/3/14, Rating: 0
RE: Sure glad
By coburn_c on 4/3/2014 10:57:45 AM , Rating: 2
Well we certainly profited from the war lend-lease and stole the financial center role from Great Britian, but the space program and the Nazi scientists we whisked out of Europe were over fears of the USSR. The work we did to improve our schools were to compete with the Soviets. The boom in the middle class was to show how capitalism was superior to socialism. World War II may have invigorated our industry and killed off a lot of workers to reduce unemployment, but it did very little to embolden the nation. In fact post WWII many people were cynical and it gave birth to nihilism. The cold war is what gave this country drive and purpose.

RE: Sure glad
By FITCamaro on 4/3/2014 12:29:17 PM , Rating: 1
We forgave nearly all those debts after the war. We profited because we were the only major nation who's infrastructure and industry wasn't decimated by the war.

RE: Sure glad
By coburn_c on 4/3/2014 1:10:53 PM , Rating: 2
Not true. The UK didn't make their last payment until 2006, the USSR was still making payments in the 70's, and the Tizard Mission was invaluable.

RE: Sure glad
By coburn_c on 4/3/2014 1:19:03 PM , Rating: 3
Actually, come to think of it, the main reparations that we forgave were from Germany. We wanted to re-industrialize West Germany to stick it to the Russians. We actually built the incredibly successful German engineering sector because of the cold war.

RE: Sure glad
By bug77 on 4/3/2014 3:57:56 PM , Rating: 2
So what are you telling me? That without the USSR you'd still be driving Model Ts?

RE: Sure glad
By coburn_c on 4/3/2014 4:20:53 PM , Rating: 2
I think I'm saying that without the cold war there would have been a global great depression following World War II.

RE: Sure glad
By Jeffk464 on 4/3/2014 4:03:34 PM , Rating: 2
World War II may have invigorated our industry and killed off a lot of workers to reduce unemployment

Don't forget that Europe's industry was completely destroyed and the US's was not only untouched but completely ramped up. It took Germany about 50 years to become an economic powerhouse again.

RE: Sure glad
By coburn_c on 4/3/2014 4:17:21 PM , Rating: 2
Europe's industry was destroyed, but no more than their economies. The Russian industry however had been totally rebuilt during the war. The Russians moved to plunder Germany and we moved to rebuild. The Morgenthau plan was replaced with the Marshall Plan and we put our industry to work fighting the 'communist scourge'.

RE: Sure glad
By delphinus100 on 4/3/2014 7:11:29 PM , Rating: 2
Another Cold War could include another Cuba...we might not be so lucky, next time.

And did the last cold War keep us on the Moon? The problem with a 'space race' is that once you win that narrowly defied goal, you aren't necessarily interested in doing more of the same. We saw that before, too. Why keep running, when the race is over, and the only competitor dropped out and pretended to never have been racing, once it was clear he could not win?

No, we need a broad policy of expanding human presence into space (including, but not limited to Mars...some people can't see past the red planet, either) for commercial and research reasons (and exploration is a subset of 'research'), at our own pace, and not go into another national tizzy over what someone else does do, does not do...or is imagined to do.

RE: Sure glad
By coburn_c on 4/3/14, Rating: 0
RE: Sure glad
By delphinus100 on 4/6/2014 3:41:44 PM , Rating: 2
Who said anything about socialism? (You're still referring to government-funded space operations, with government-chosen goals, anyway.)

Perhaps I should have explicitly said this, but my idea of 'a broad policy of expanding human presence into space' includes, indeed emphasizes commercial manned space activities, wherever practical.

As far as I'm concerned, the Commercial Crew program (including Bigelow Aerospace leased orbital stations) will do more to this end than Orion/SLS, by ultimately being self-sustaining and increasingly less reliant on the whims of government and politics (ours or someone else's) just as aviation and seafaring in general already are. That's competition I can well live with.

"This is about the Internet.  Everything on the Internet is encrypted. This is not a BlackBerry-only issue. If they can't deal with the Internet, they should shut it off." -- RIM co-CEO Michael Lazaridis
Latest Headlines

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Yahoo Hacked - Change Your Passwords and Security Info ASAP!
September 23, 2016, 5:45 AM
A is for Apples
September 23, 2016, 5:32 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki