←back to thread

NASA chief suggests SpaceX may be booted from moon mission

(www.cnn.com)
404 points voxleone | 6 comments | 21 Oct 25 12:58 UTC | HN request time: 1.311s | source | bottom
Show context
bahmboo ◴[21 Oct 25 19:15 UTC] No.45660320[source]▶
"The president and I want to get to the moon in this president's term" - Sean Duffy NASA administrator.

A scary way to set a schedule on a complex project with lives at stake. They don't care though.

replies(23): >>45660416 #>>45660527 #>>45660821 #>>45660902 #>>45660920 #>>45660957 #>>45661025 #>>45661086 #>>45661197 #>>45661359 #>>45661924 #>>45662101 #>>45662301 #>>45663008 #>>45663548 #>>45663848 #>>45663936 #>>45664547 #>>45665860 #>>45666795 #>>45667744 #>>45670520 #>>45686581 #
jm4 ◴[21 Oct 25 20:02 UTC] No.45660957[source]▶
The silver lining is that they are operating under the assumption that he will leave office at the conclusion of his term.
replies(1): >>45661073 #
sigmoid10[dead post] ◴[21 Oct 25 20:13 UTC] No.45661073[source]▶
[flagged]
UltraSane ◴[21 Oct 25 22:04 UTC] No.45662321[source]▶
Ain't gonna happen. It would actually trigger a civil war.
replies(1): >>45662896 #
boston_clone ◴[21 Oct 25 23:06 UTC] No.45662896[source]▶
and what about him openly stating how he's considered declaring martial law to suspend elections?

an apt comparison I saw elsewhere is that the left side of the aisle is acting like the opposing team from Air Bud: "hey, a dog can't play basketball, it's against the rules!!" meanwhile, the dog is making shots over and over again.

replies(1): >>45663952 #
UltraSane ◴[22 Oct 25 01:29 UTC] No.45663952[source]▶
"declaring martial law to suspend elections?"

This would also absolutely trigger a civil war.

replies(1): >>45664885 #
boston_clone ◴[22 Oct 25 04:28 UTC] No.45664885[source]▶
i don’t think we should lull ourselves into complacency with projected certainties. if you listen to right-wing discourse, you’d know there is an not insignificant contingent of folks that are very okay with that path
replies(1): >>45668521 #
UltraSane ◴[22 Oct 25 13:08 UTC] No.45668521[source]▶
Which is why it would trigger a civil war. Republicans will destroy democracy in the US before accepting defeat but the rest of us are not going to lie down and let them.
replies(1): >>45672864 #
1. jm4 ◴[22 Oct 25 18:02 UTC] No.45672864[source]▶
Who is going to lead? It's not as if we can all spontaneously take to the streets and start fighting the bad guys. It requires leadership, logistics, weapons, planning, and about a thousand other things. A would be leader would be taken out immediately. Realistically, the most feasible way a two-sided civil war happens is if a number of generals revolt. That's a big if. Soldiers need to eat and get paid. Who's going to do that? Otherwise, it's just the government - aka the orange lunatic with all the guns and money - running roughshod over everyone.

The most optimistic scenario would be an open and overwhelming revolt at all levels of government and forcing him to leave simply because there's nobody left who will obey. After that, we would need to return to some semblance of sanity and amend the constitution to prevent anything like this from happening again. It requires a competent Congress with principles and conviction. Furthermore, it requires massive public support. Unfortunately, about 30% of the population is eager to support the orange bastard and watch the world burn.

The country will be dealing with the fallout of this POS for the next 150 years, assuming the country even lasts that long.

replies(1): >>45676395 #
2. UltraSane ◴[22 Oct 25 23:20 UTC] No.45676395[source]▶
The military would NOT support a third term for Trump. They swear to uphold the constitution and the constitution clearly says no president can serve for more than two terms. Same with any other tricks they try to pull that would let Trump still be president in 2029.
replies(1): >>45677068 #
3. jm4 ◴[23 Oct 25 01:06 UTC] No.45677068[source]▶
That’s the assumption and I hope it’s correct. We are in uncharted territory though. He’s been actively purging non-loyalists and punishing his foes. This is the dictator playbook and my fear is that he will be completely entrenched by the time anyone realizes he needs to be forced out.
replies(1): >>45677557 #
4. UltraSane ◴[23 Oct 25 02:34 UTC] No.45677557{3}[source]▶
The dictator playbook can't work with the way the US military is structured around loyalty to the constitution and not a person and Trump can't change that. I would estimate 90% of all officers despise him and basically none of them will support him in blatantly violating the constitution.
replies(1): >>45685500 #
5. jm4 ◴[23 Oct 25 19:02 UTC] No.45685500{4}[source]▶
That was always my belief too. Now I'm less sure than I used to be. I hope you're right.
replies(1): >>45686910 #
6. UltraSane ◴[23 Oct 25 20:48 UTC] No.45686910{5}[source]▶
Do you actually envision the military accepting a third Trump term when it directly violates the constitution? It would be a violation of their oath.