What about logic and politics?

[Dr.Acula]

Hello, folks 

Actually I'm on a debate with some HB's from Germany. I'm not an engineer or a scientist, so I decided to think about the logic of a moon hoax including the political dimension (domestically and with regard to foreign affairs).

My intention is, that the whole moon hoax doesn't make sense in logic and on the political level. Let me start with the political aspect and (especially to our US members) please correct me, if I'm wrong.

The Apollo program was invented by President Kennedy and it was continued after his assassination by President Johnson. In January 1969 Richard Nixon became President of the United States. Nixon is discribed as the political enemy of Kennedy, he lost the 1961's election. And Nixon is discribed as a personal enemy of the Kennedy clan. It's to add, that Nixon was unwilling to fund NASA at the existing level.

In January 1969 the Apollo program was "on the run". Apollo 8 was a success in 1968, Apollo 9 was launched in March and Apollo 10 in May 1969. Now I want to know from the HB's why Nixon should cover a hoax. It makes no sense.

In the case NASA started the hoax before Nixon entered the White House, it would have been a belated political success over his enemy Kennedy to uncover a hoax. In the case NASA wanted to fake the moonlandings, why should Nixon support it? Only Kennedy as the inventor of Apollo would gain (posthum) reputation. The only choice for Nixon was to let it go. If the mission succeeded, the USA would win the race to the Moon. If the mission ended in a catastrophe, Nixon could say "Every time I was sceptic about this program."

I hope, I'm able to make clear my point of view. And I hope I haven't made too many mistakes (especially in regard of the political circumstances at this time).

[darren r]

I don't know. I think that might be a risky path to go down. Nobody has ever challenged Nixon's 'patriotism' and anti-communist credentials. A hoax believer might argue that whatever his feelings towards JFK, if he had discovered Apollo was a hoax, he may have gone along with it because it was sticking it to the commies. And, of course, because all conspiracies are part of a unified whole, he may have been threatened with the same fate that befell Kennedy if he didn't play ball. I have seen it argued that Apollo was suspect precisely because it continued during Nixon's term and he was corrupt and untrustworthy, so obviously.....

You should also bear in mind that Kennedy didn't invent Apollo. NASA was already planning a future moon landing well before his announcement - he just gave them a, nearly unworkable, timetable.

[onebigmonkey]

I think Nixon was an opportunist and was happy to ride the coat-tails of a successful program.

The logic is that as long as it was a public success, fake or not, he was happy to take the credit for it. Notice he didn't turn up to a launch until they'd had a moon landing that worked. I have had many 'discussions' with a HB on ATS whose rabid obsession with all things Nixon, and his political and financial ally Howard Hughes, has him to blame for pretty much everything. His argument was that Nixon new full well that it was faked and went along with it to keep himself bankrolled and in power.

There's been something published recently arguing that Nixon did not oppose Apollo as such, but did oppose the budget NASA received, and it was actually NASA's decision to cut the Apollo budget. I find this a little like our modern UK national government giving local government power to decide how to spend their budgets, them refusing to give enough money for public services. They then blame local governments that fail to deliver those services on the grounds that it was up to them to decide how much money they spent on them.

[Dr.Acula]

You should also bear in mind that Kennedy didn't invent Apollo. NASA was already planning a future moon landing well before his announcement - he just gave them a, nearly unworkable, timetable.

Thank you very much for correcting me. The problem is, we here in Germany don't care much about the US politics in the 1960s. Most of us (Germans) know about Kennedy's congress-speech about sending men to moon before the end of the decade. That's the reason for my mistake, I guess.

[Dr.Acula]

I think Nixon was an opportunist and was happy to ride the coat-tails of a successful program.

That's my thought about Nixon either. Let it go to celebrate a victory in the moon-race. And for the case of failure, he had a speech (http://www.space.com/26604-apollo-11-failure-nixon-speech.html).

[gillianren]

In the '50s, Nixon and the Kennedys got along.  Nixon then felt personally betrayed by Kennedy for several reasons, and no one was more implacable in the face of wrongs, real or imagined, than Nixon.  I personally don't think his mental makeup would have let him go blithely along with a hoax if there were a chance to convince people they should just like him more than they liked JFK.  We know from Watergate that Nixon didn't necessarily worry as to whether things were in his best political interests or not once he'd decided people were against him.  (Continuing to plan to use the IRS or the FBI against his enemies even after being under investigation for same, for example.)  We also know that he was willing to do things that might make people see him as "soft on Communism" (see "Only Nixon Could Go to China").

The thing is, though, it's still hard to know what Nixon would or wouldn't do, because Nixon was in many ways a very private person.  I read a book about mental illness and figures of political power, and the author suggests that Nixon was perfectly mentally healthy.  I, however, suspect he may have been a low-level paranoid schizophrenic.  Certainly the paranoia that author chalked up as "well, you know, people really were out to get him" doesn't hold up when you really start looking at "the enemies list."  (Seriously--one of the twenty people on the original list was Paul Newman.)  I think he would have exposed Apollo, and for two reasons.  One, "make them like me by showing them that Kennedy lied to them."  Two, I really do think he would have thought the hoax was unAmerican and unpatriotic, and I think he would have known that it could not have stood forever, given our enemies--like the USSR and Paul Newman--a chance to crow over it.  I don't think he would have seen it as triumphing over the Commies, because it wasn't real.

[Luckmeister]

The Apollo program was invented by President Kennedy and it was continued after his assassination by President Johnson.

It's interesting to learn that Johnson assassinated Kennedy. Of course that conclusion was not intended but it's the way I read that statement at first because of the misplaced modifier. It's a good example of how a grammatical error can cause serious misunderstanding.

[Sus_pilot]

The Apollo program was invented by President Kennedy and it was continued after his assassination by President Johnson.

It's interesting to learn that Johnson assassinated Kennedy. Of course that conclusion was not intended but it's the way I read that statement at first because of the misplaced modifier. It's a good example of how a grammatical error can cause serious misunderstanding.

Well, there is a CT that says a cabal led by LBJ was responsible for the assassination, but I, for one, don't believe it.

[Dr.Acula]

The Apollo program was invented by President Kennedy and it was continued after his assassination by President Johnson.

It's interesting to learn that Johnson assassinated Kennedy. Of course that conclusion was not intended but it's the way I read that statement at first because of the misplaced modifier. It's a good example of how a grammatical error can cause serious misunderstanding.

Thank you to point out my mistake. Sometimes it's hard to make a point in a foreign language. But I'm eased, that you know, what I wanted to say 

[Dr.Acula]

I think he would have exposed Apollo, and for two reasons.  One, "make them like me by showing them that Kennedy lied to them."  Two, I really do think he would have thought the hoax was unAmerican and unpatriotic, and I think he would have known that it could not have stood forever, given our enemies--like the USSR and Paul Newman--a chance to crow over it.  I don't think he would have seen it as triumphing over the Commies, because it wasn't real.

Thank you for this very interesting response. I agree with you.

[AstroBrant]

The Apollo program was invented by President Kennedy and it was continued after his assassination by President Johnson.

It's interesting to learn that Johnson assassinated Kennedy. Of course that conclusion was not intended but it's the way I read that statement at first because of the misplaced modifier. It's a good example of how a grammatical error can cause serious misunderstanding.

How many sentences I have labored to fix in order to avoid such misunderstandings! Even if you re-worded it, "The Apollo program was invented by President Kennedy and it was continued by President Johnson after his assassination," it would be confusing: "What?? Johnson was assassinated? If so, then how did he continue the program after he was dead?"

My solution would be the revision I suggested and replace "his" with "Kennedy's." It's those damned ambiguous pronouns! (Not rejecting your "misplaced modifier" description, as the pronoun "his" actually functions as an adjective.)

[raven]

Nixon probably wasn't exactly a fan of Apollo, Apollo 17 was almost cancelled if it hadn't been practically begged to let it fly, but he certainly would be willing to make what political hay that he could out of it.
Still, the whole "Nixon was untrustworthy, and he 'made' Apollo" is certainly grossly inaccurate.