Space isn't ours.

Space is like all frontiers. It doesn't matter how loudly anyone argues back at home. It belongs to the people who <i>go there</i>.<p>Space is different than our other frontiers because as a proportion of its size to ours, its unprecedented. It belongs to <i>everyone</i> who wants to go, and will for a very long time.<p>"take my love, take my land, take me where I cannot stand, I don't care, I'm still free, you can't take the sky from me"

The achievement doesn't belong to the world. It doesn't belong to Americans either.<p>It belongs to the people who actually goddamn contributed to the project. The people who coded it, who built it, who put in the hard effort. Yes, American people funded it, via taxes, but they didn't actually <i>pick</i> to fund it, their government decided it was a good idea. A random person in the states flipping burgers is no more responsible for NASA's achievements than someone flipping burgers in France, or in China, or in Ireland.<p>I don't say this to be negative, or to put a downer on this fantastic event: I was watching the live-stream with my heart in my mouth, and it's an amazing achievement.<p>But, if we're going to bring this kind of thing up, I felt like I might as well voice my criticism of this 'couch-achieving' that seems to be to popular.<p>My country (NZ) currently has the most gold medals in the Olympics of any nation on Earth... provided to measure them per capita. Some people are proud of this achievement. That's fair, you could argue that some of a countries success in the games are based around the logistics of simply sourcing good people, and so the more people you have the better your chances. What doesn't make sense is when people I know talk as if <i>they themselves</i> achieved something.<p>Sorry if this is a rant, but I really wish people would just be proud of whgat <i>they themselves</i> have achieved, and be proud of other people when they achieve great things, instead of trying to live through other people.

You say space isn't ours if ours=Americans but space is ours for ours=humans.<p>I disagree. Space is there, and it's fine for us to explore it (although space garbage is an issue), but claiming it is just typical human pettiness.

A lot of the arguments here, whether for or against the idea that this achievement 'belongs' to the U.S., miss an important point.<p>Not everyone working on past, current and future Mars Exploration Programs is an American citizen. The funding may be from the U.S., but the individual contributions at NASA come from all over the world.<p>To name just three, there's Fernando Abilleira, Spain (trajectory analyst); Nathalie Cabrol, France (planetary geologist); and Firouz Naderi, Iran (manager of the Mars Exploration Program). There's a huge list of people, you should check it out: <a href="http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/programmissions/people/" rel="nofollow">http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/programmissions/people/</a>

Nasa needs to play politics a bit: after all it competes with everything else for funding. More power to them. Something to be proud to spend tax money on...

What an utterly pointless article capitalizing on the success of the NASA team. Nobody is saying space is America's, what they were saying was that this was a big day for the American space program, because it was NASA, not the Chinese space agency, or the Russians or anyone else that put Curiosity on mars.<p>And I'm not even an American. I will be just as happy next time any other nation does something like this too, but this one belongs to the Americans.

I'm not an American but I don't feel offended in any way by the statement that this is a great day for Americans. It is both a great day for humanity and USA. The latter will ripe the technological benefits of such a milestone. The rest of us will enjoy a triumph of human spirit.

Interestingly, there actually exists an Outer Space Treaty. [1] [2] (aka "<i>Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies</i>")<p>It was initially promulgated by the USA, UK and [then] USSR in 1967, a 100 countries are currently party to it (with a further 26 signatories pending ratification], and it explicitly says, "outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means".<p>All this is under the ambit of the United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs.<p>Personally, the cynic in me can't help but believe that the USA was an eager initial party to this because they were terrified that the Soviet Union would pip them to the Moon-post.<p>[1] <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty</a><p>[2] <a href="http://www.oosa.unvienna.org/oosa/SpaceLaw/outerspt.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.oosa.unvienna.org/oosa/SpaceLaw/outerspt.html</a>

Futile and very foolish. Space MUST be owned. Humans do not invest in, nor do they take care of or clean up things they cannot own. Case-in-point: Great Pacific Garbage Patch (along with the other 4 oceanic garbage patches). The inability to own property is devastating to a civilization. Property ownership is a form of democracy that is necessary in human societies. Too much ownership can be devastating due to human greed (The Amazon) and no ownership can be devistating due to lack of desire to protect something that isn't yours (Earth's Oceans, African Tribal Lands).<p>Examples:<p>1) I also do volunteer environmental cleanup. So far I've bagged 523 pounds of garbage from forested areas and some abandoned private properties. Garbage pollution happens in forested areas and land where neither party knows exactly who owns what. Land without ownership is allowed to accumulate garbage which flows into the storm drains, into the rivers, and into the oceans. Without ownership, one cannot be accountable. Without ownership there can be no consequences or rule of law. People don't take care of things they don't own (or realize they own).<p>2) Many African countries are still on the "communal lands" system. Where no one owns any land and individuals simply have a right to live on it. This lack of land rights and ownership is one of the main reasons why so many Africans live in poverty, are behind, cannot build wealth, and resulted in the 2010 Great African Land Grab. Fertile Land the size of France was taken away from numerous African nations at only 23 cents per hectare. That's 23 cents. The normal rate can be $1,000 per hectare. Natives are forced off the land by force.<p><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/poverty-matters/2012/mar/02/african-governments-land-deals" rel="nofollow">http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/poverty-matters...</a><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y05fzp0YSrw" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y05fzp0YSrw</a><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxFTGq94dXs" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxFTGq94dXs</a><p><a href="http://www.oaklandinstitute.org/special-investigation-two-land-deals-africa" rel="nofollow">http://www.oaklandinstitute.org/special-investigation-two-la...</a>

As long as America is paying for the vast majority of space exploration, the achievements belong to us. We spend almost 3 times the entire rest of the world combined, about $60 billion to $22 billion a year. Global achievement requires global contribution. Leveled for GDP, the rest of the world would need to spend about $160 billion a year more than they are.<p><i>Editing in more details from posts I've made before:</i><p>The total 2010 US Space budget was $64.6B. The entire rest of the world combined spent only $22.5B. NASA's 2010 budget was $18.7B, 83% of the spending for the rest of the world. The entire ESA budget is a paltry $4.6B, while the EU has a higher GDP than the US.<p>Not all US space spending is through NASA. For example, the GPS system is not included in NASA's budget, it's spearheaded by the Air Force Space Command, and comes out of the Defense budget. And before anyone says that Defense space spending should not be included, keep in mind that will dramatically reduce the overall global space budget which does include defense spending. For example, the European Galileo satellite navigation system, which has cost some €20B, is included in the ESA budget, so it would have to be taken out in order to compare with NASA, our civilian space program.<p>If the rest of the world spent as much as the United States on space exploration by GDP, global space spending would be 4.1 times higher than it is today. $267B instead of $87.1B.

Pretty much every player in the space industry gets their funding through government (directly or indirectly). It's not so surprising that they often try to frame space exploration as an "us vs them" thing like the Cold War wasn't over. Personally, I find this attitude pretty annoying but well, I am not American either.

Space will not be ours. The earth is not ours. The portion of earth that you and your neighbours inhabit is not yours, nor mine nor my neighbours. Your possessions are not yours. They are simply in your presence for a brief period of time and you cling to them, believing they are forever yours.<p>The illusion of ownership is a facet of much suffering of, and is caused by humans (and other sentient beings, for we are all animals) under the idea that they own things, collectively or individually. How can things external of a being be owned by it, when the being, as well as that it considers itself to own, are transient, impermanent and microscopic in the long game? Especially when we consider that this illusion causes suffering to ourselves (through loss) and others (through the opportunity to grasp that which is denied).

"Take" is a strange choice of words for space. Take implies possession. Possessing something as vast as the "sky" is ridiculous. Its debatable whether humanity even possesses the world we inhabit...some might say we're temporary interlopers (on a geological timescale human history is less than a eye blink) and there is no guarantee of our long term survival. And if humanity flames out in a blaze of biological armageddon, some other evolutionary species will end up "possessing" earth.

&#62;We need to take it<p>This was one of the main themes in Lem's <i>Solaris</i> (ignore the subpar George Clooney knock-off). Really a great read for sci-fi fans.

You're right, space hasn't a property. Even the world, maybe, shouldn't have it as it belongs to space. Property is a human invention. Yes, it is a great day for everyone, but it is exceptionally more great for those people who financed the NASA program by paying more taxes for it. Maybe sooner or later we'll see a joint cooperation between different countries to discover farther worlds.<p>PS: I'm not american.

NASA does this ALLLLL the time. And as an Australian it pisses me off. Particularly when they throw in "God bless America" at the end. Such a primitive tagline to a scientific endeavour.<p>What we need is an International space exploration program where countries can be involved provided they commit a certain percentage of their GDP.

I watched the beginning of the NASA JPL press conference and the overt patriotism was unbearable (at least for me as an European citizen). They not only coarsely described as an American victory, but also patronized foreign Mars projects – the successful ones apparently being a result of "American leadership".

There were a number of times during the live stream that NASA people followed up "a great day for america" with "and a great day for humankind/the-world." It happened frequently enough that I'm confident that any NASA list of talking points included "a great day for us and a great day for humankind."

And when we find another alien civilization, then we have a whole 'nother set of things to deal with.

The last time I checked, in about 1000 years Mars would be pretty much owned by Leo and Inez Wong.

Earthlings!

Nobody in the media or in NASA claimed that the space belongs to one country (i.e. US). The author is simply inventing an issue to promote some kumbaya BS. No country invests in space exploration if there is no direct benefit to that country first.

Good (?) thing this wasn't the Russian space program.<p>In America, you own space.<p>In Soviet Russia, <i>space own you!</i>