• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Apollo "hoax" discussion - continuation thread

Posted by Bubba View Post
I can only guess that now you are imagining that I said they profited.

"They" meant the Russkies. I wasnt seeing them as potential co-scammers.

Point being that I'm suggesting any (hypothetical) exaggeration of threat could have been unilateral and made by Ike's MCIC to influence US public and congress. Power and profit being the motive. Lotsa $ went to certain congressional districts.


For your suggestion to work, namely, that the Cold War was trumped up/exaggerated/faked for the benefit of the MIC, you are going to have to explain how the Soviets benefited from it, because it takes two to tango.
Some years ago there was a movie called "War Games". I was a mostly awful, cheesy movie with a bad plot, poor dialogue and even worse acting, but right at the end of the game, the computer, Joshua, said the one thing that made the most sense in the whole movie...

....nuclear war is a strange game, the only winning move is not to play.

If the western MIC was so hell bent on making a big fat profit from gearing up for global nuclear domination, how would things have gone for them if the Soviets decided not to play?

I dont see where the Soviets had to benefit at all, if it was trumped up by Ike's MCIC for their benefit alone. I can see where Russkies could even be thinking 'those other guys are trumping it up for profit'.

If Ike's MCIC was more than hot air, this to me seems plausible back then and maybe later as well in other areas, unless someone shut down Ike's MCIC, which aint so likely, IMO.
 
I could be wrong, but I think Bubba is solely talking about the US talking up Soviet capabilities in the late 50s into the 60s. Not that there weren't ICBMs at all.

So no need for any Soviet collusion.

Thanks.

I should not have assumed it was obvious Ike's MCIC wasn't Russian.


Ike's warning about the military industrial complex gaining too much influence was apt at the time, but was largely in response to the Democratic campaign which (IIRC) pointed out the missile gap. It wasn't a pointer to some vast conspiracy behind the scenes..


True. No conspiracy needed per perceived threat. More like MCIC business as usual except on a scale not seen before at a new buffet featuring larger portions and exotic high priced secret recipes
 
Because it was Sergei Korolev's dream.

Korolev was the Soviet's "von Braun" except, of course, he was Russian, not German.

Here is an excellent docudrama about von Braun and Korolev. Anyone who is truly interested in the history of the Soviet/American space race should set aside 90 minutes to watch because it is well worth the time spent....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWumRGO1420

Great, I've seen a bit on Korolev, thanks.

I'll swap you a Yuri for a Sergei. Former KGB defector guy Yuri Bezmenov spills beans re their programs meant to destroy America. AFAIK his story fits with what we've been told by govt. I cant confirm it.

Interesting stuff like ideological subversion, pysch subversion, useful idiots,

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=bezmenov
 
But then they struggled to keep up, bankrupting their country in the process. Explain why.


(yawn)

Not realizing he walked into a wild hypothetical and irrelevant frivolous fantasy bar, would be curmudgeon asks serious questions.

;)

Nonetheless,

I'd speculate and hypothesize (all I ever do) that the Ruskies knew the difference between ***** and shinola.

Did I write a bad word?

Once upon a time I came upon a yacht named Shinola. Before I finished the question, the skipper said 'Yeh, it means what you think it means.'
 
Last edited:
But then they struggled to keep up, bankrupting their country in the process. Explain why.

I don't think this is a question that most can answer. I would guess that very few people understand the cost of developing and deploying new weapon systems. To some extent there seems to be an assumption that you can just combine New Deal programs like the Civilian Conservation Corps with Fascist ideals and end up with a self-sustaining industry, what Eisenhower referred to as the military-industrial complex.

The naive thinking seems to be that the military gets weapons, the companies get contracts, and the workers get jobs. Politicians get to look tough on defense, appear supportive of the military, and get to bring jobs to their state or district; and everyone is happy. At least, that is the naive view.

People don't see the reality even when it's obvious. Back during WWII, the newsreels pointed out that Germany's production of artillery, tanks, and aircraft meant that they weren't producing stoves, refrigerators, and cars. Have people forgotten the East Germans who proudly drove their Trabants into West Germany in 1989? These cars were built with 600 cc, two cylinder, two-stroke motorcycle engines which produced all of 23 HP. Compare this with the 1966, 1300 cc VW Beetle engine which produced 50 HP.
 
I don't think this is a question that most can answer. I would guess that very few people understand the cost of developing and deploying new weapon systems. To some extent there seems to be an assumption that you can just combine New Deal programs like the Civilian Conservation Corps with Fascist ideals and end up with a self-sustaining industry, what Eisenhower referred to as the military-industrial complex.

The naive thinking seems to be that the military gets weapons, the companies get contracts, and the workers get jobs. Politicians get to look tough on defense, appear supportive of the military, and get to bring jobs to their state or district; and everyone is happy. At least, that is the naive view.

People don't see the reality even when it's obvious. Back during WWII, the newsreels pointed out that Germany's production of artillery, tanks, and aircraft meant that they weren't producing stoves, refrigerators, and cars. Have people forgotten the East Germans who proudly drove their Trabants into West Germany in 1989? These cars were built with 600 cc, two cylinder, two-stroke motorcycle engines which produced all of 23 HP. Compare this with the 1966, 1300 cc VW Beetle engine which produced 50 HP.

guns or butter
 
I dont see where the Soviets had to benefit at all

The Soviets didn't benefit. The cost to them was enormous and unsustainable. It is a basic concept in economics that cost/production is a curve. This is because while some things can be substituted, not everything can be. For example, if you were short of wood you might build more houses out of brick. If you were short of beef you could eat more pork or chicken. But this substitution is not 100%. If you keep pushing it, the costs increase and bend the curve upwards. If you view military production in terms of the cost curve then there is a zone where the effect on the economy is small or even somewhat beneficial. However, as this is increased, the costs become greater and less efficient. The effect on the economy becomes more negative. This puts a drag on infrastructure and investment. It can't be sustained over a long term. You end up with what happened in the Soviet Union and most of Eastern Europe. We are still seeing this in China where Beijing has some of the worst air pollution in the world.
 
The Soviets didn't benefit. The cost to them was enormous and unsustainable. It is a basic concept in economics that cost/production is a curve. This is because while some things can be substituted, not everything can be. For example, if you were short of wood you might build more houses out of brick. If you were short of beef you could eat more pork or chicken. But this substitution is not 100%. If you keep pushing it, the costs increase and bend the curve upwards. If you view military production in terms of the cost curve then there is a zone where the effect on the economy is small or even somewhat beneficial. However, as this is increased, the costs become greater and less efficient. The effect on the economy becomes more negative. This puts a drag on infrastructure and investment. It can't be sustained over a long term. You end up with what happened in the Soviet Union and most of Eastern Europe. We are still seeing this in China where Beijing has some of the worst air pollution in the world.

There was a study done I believe in the 70's that found that the greatest profit from WW I was obtained by suppliers of nitrate for explosives the cost of that commodity when up several hundred percent. The country that benefited most from this was Chile.......therefore in CT thought Chile must have been the hidden hand causing WWI....lol
 
If you think of a criminal trial, you have means, opportunity, and motive. Much of the discussion about the moon hoax seems to fall, rather fruitlessly on the motive part. But, imagine that going to the moon was illegal and as a defense attorney you were trying to prove that the US wasn't guilty. Dwelling on motive would be a waste of time.

Let's say that I'm the prosecutor. For motive, I would point out that the US was so obsessed that they even began working on the Erie Canal when no college in the US even offered an engineering degree. This gap in expertise was so glaring that West Point scrambled to put together an engineering degree in 1817 from the Army Corps of Engineers that had been established under Thomas Jefferson in 1802. There wasn't another engineering school until 1823. Would a country that would begin building a 360 mile long canal with an unprecedented rise of 600' and no engineers actually be daunted by a space program? This same country closed up a 1,700 gap to complete the transcontinental railroad in just six years. This country built the Panama Canal, the Hoover Dam, and completed the Manhattan Project. The record shows that the US has a long history of engaging in grand and expensive engineering projects. There is no reason to think a lunar program would be any different.

The most productive defense would be to the show that the US did not have opportunity. And, to do this, all you would need to show was that some key piece of technology was missing from the timeline leading up to Apollo 11.
 
Because it was Sergei Korolev's dream.

Korolev was the Soviet's "von Braun" except, of course, he was Russian, not German.

Here is an excellent docudrama about von Braun and Korolev. Anyone who is truly interested in the history of the Soviet/American space race should set aside 90 minutes to watch because it is well worth the time spent....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWumRGO1420

Thank you for digging this up. I saw this video. I couldn't find it when I posted. I also forgot Korolev's name.

I don't think that either Braun or Korelev would support for an Apollo fraud. In fact, most of the Nazi scientists would support such a fraud. I don't think their was any fraud at all. If there is one thing one could say about the Nazis, then it is that they were honest. Tactical deceits, yes. Strategic falsehoods, never!

I was wrong when I used the word 'conspiracy' before. I meant more like 'quid pro quo'. I don't think there was any direct communication between Korelev and Warner. Having common backgrounds, they could deduce what they other was thinking from the others actions. Certainly there was no oral or written agreement. I speculate there was what lawyers would call 'quid pro quo'. Y

Also, I know that the 'military industrial complex' (MIC) is not monolithic. I fully agree that most of the people managing and owning the corporations had families, friends and fairly benign ideologies. The majority of what we call the MIC would be deeply devastated by a nuclear war. However, a nuclear exchange would not affect everyone the same degree.



No one had shown, or has shown, that a nuclear war would really wipe out the human species. There were lots of movies showing it. That was a speculation. Everyone in Europe and Asia knew that a society could be rebuilt even if 80% of its people were wiped out. I got that percentage from 'Mein Kampf', by the way.

Hitler said that to prevent overpopulation, 80% of all human beings in each generation should die violently one way or another while the rest reproduce like jack rabbits. The survivors would be the master race. They needn't even be Germans! Every member of the SS, from Braun to Korelev, were required to read Mein Kampf . They were expected to take it seriously. I speculate that both Braun and Korelev wanted their families to be part of the remaining 20%.

I further speculate that a lot of Nazi scientists wanted their families to be part of the 20%. The master race must survive. That is why so many of had such large families :) Braun had a lot of children!

Lets do a cost-benefit analysis of what nuclear war would mean. I am not just talking about money. I acknowledge that the main cost would be in people, not money. Ask your selves what part of the MIC would NOT be devastated if nuclear war had really broken out between the U.S. and Russia. I maintain that it was those people living near the White Sands Missile Range that would be least threatened by an actual nuclear war.


Many of the German scientists lived in the region near the White Sands Missile Range. If a nuclear bomb hit New York or Washington, DC, no of Brauns family would be killed. El Paso and Las Cruces could be targets. What, Las Cruces a target? :p However, these are not high density populations. A nuke hitting El Paso would not kill as many people as a nuke that hits New York. Most of the scientists probably lived in the suburbs anyway.

I speculate a similar situation existed in Russia. It is unlikely that most of Korelev's family lived in Moscow. If Braun managed to get the U.S. to nuke Moscow, like he speculated in his novel, it is unlikely that any Korelev's would be killed. Moscow is occupied mainly by Slavs, who Mein Kampf tells us are subhuman. So relatively few families of the Master Race would be killed by a one nuke on Moscow.

So Korelev and and Braun are doing a cost-benefit analysis of a heated cold war. Their main criteria is the probable cost and benefit to their immediate families. Maybe they have a slight concern about the other ones family, since they probably knew each other. They do not know many people in the America or Russia.

The Nazis don't even know many German Americans. Braun has no incentive to protect the German communities already set up in the United States. None of them are HIS relatives. His German community is concentrated in a area full of Hispanics, Jewish refuges, and a few ranchers who will be pushed out anyway. In the mind of some Nazis, the German American is a traitor.

Let us consider the cost an benefits of an arms race.

Suppose there was no arms race at all. Braun, Korelev and community have no jobs or social status. Their families are poor. They are also rejected by their societies. Their may be no community since there is no focus to keep the different German families together. Definitely one doesn't want that.

Suppose their is an arms race with a nuclear war. Lets us imagine a really bad one, where 80% of the population in each community is wiped out. Most of it would be in the urban centers. The Nazi families would mostly be untouched in farm communities with lots of jobs. Hey, no labor. Not very pleasant prospect, but it has a future.

Suppose their is an arms race with NO nuclear war. Lots of jobs for the families. Lots of money. Lots of social status. They became American heroes. Some of them even buy land. Room for their hamilies to grow. And grow and grow.

Maybe some of them could ind jobs on Mars, if a colony was set up? I know that Braun thought space colonization would benefit mankind. He may have even thought of it as a non genocidal way to alleviate the population problem. So if the arms race lead to space colonization, maybe there would be no need for genocide!

So the focal point of the arms race for him would be the colonization of space. The nukes, if necessary, would alleviate the short term problem of over population.

Now, these things a very complex. I am not going to say that it was all planned by Braun and Korelev. They were only two people who couldn't make people do what they wanted. Obviously, there were other factors that greatly amplified their efforts. If people didn't already feel unsafe for other reasons, then the Nazis couldn't get them to go along so easily.

I only point out that as far as Braun and Korelev are concerned, an Apollo moon fraud would be counter productive. It is exactly the wrong thing for their families. A fraud gives them nothing to do and achieves no long term goals. Family dynasties don't really thrive on frauds.

The fraud would have to start from the very beginning to be effective. One would have to make a story for each penny spent on developing manned flight. So I don't think a Apollo fraud would be supported by Braun or Korelev. There is no benefit to their families and lots of potential cost.
 
I don't think that either Braun or Korelev would support for an Apollo fraud.
It wouldn't make any difference. The Soviet space program consisted of many, many people as did the US space program. The actions of two people really wouldn't matter.

No one had shown, or has shown, that a nuclear war would really wipe out the human species. There were lots of movies showing it. That was a speculation. Everyone in Europe and Asia knew that a society could be rebuilt even if 80% of its people were wiped out.
Sometimes it's nice to include at least a few facts when engaging in delusional rambling. Europe had a good record of what happened around 1350.

"the Black Death is estimated to have killed 30–60% of Europe's total population"

The US also had direct evidence of what happened in 1918.

"In the U.S. 500,000 to 675,000 died"

That was out of a population of 103 million.

Every member of the SS, from Braun to Korelev
Maybe you were half asleep when you wrote this. Von Braun was member of the Nazi party; he was never in the SS. Korelev was Ukrainian. He was sent to a Gulag in Siberia in 1939. He was brought back to Moscow and spent the rest of the war in a prison camp where he worked on aircraft and rocket assisted takeoff.

A nuke hitting El Paso would not kill as many people as a nuke that hits New York. Most of the scientists probably lived in the suburbs anyway.
Von Braun was in El Paso from 1945-1950. He moved to Alabama in 1950.

His German community is concentrated in a area full of Hispanics, Jewish refuges, and a few ranchers who will be pushed out anyway.
In Alabama?

Suppose there was no arms race at all. Braun, Korelev and community have no jobs or social status.
You seem to be confused. Although Korelev did work on the R-7 which was indeed an ICBM, Braun didn't work on any missiles after the Redstone which was not intercontinental. And, Korelev didn't work on any after 1957. By 1958, neither was involved with military weapons.
 
Von Braun was member of the Nazi party; he was never in the SS.

Not true; he joined the SS in 1940. He had been convinced that doing so was the only way he would be allowed to continue rocket development. He received his last promotion in the SS hierarchy in 1943. He was also a member of the Nazi party, beginning in 1939. The broad view of the evidence suggests he never looked at these memberships as anything other than requirements of the circumstances in which he found himself, in order to continue his work.
 
Not true; he joined the SS in 1940. He had been convinced that doing so was the only way he would be allowed to continue rocket development. He received his last promotion in the SS hierarchy in 1943. He was also a member of the Nazi party, beginning in 1939. The broad view of the evidence suggests he never looked at these memberships as anything other than requirements of the circumstances in which he found himself, in order to continue his work.

What you wrote shows the great lengths Braun was willing to go to to continue rocket development. He wanted to launch humanity into outer space. He personally wanted to go to the moon. It didn't matter how many people he would have to step on to get there.

Braun was an opportunist, not a sadist. I don't think he hated anybody. He probably thought of himself as saving all mankind, superman and subhumans together :D

The SS was run like a cult. They used Mein Kampf as a sacred text. They had their own festivals and very emotional rituals. This wasn't slavery, it was a fellowship of free men.

This would make it very hard to fake being opposed. It would be very difficult to stay in that organization without believing it some of what was written in Mein Kampf. A free peace peace isn't even possible according to fascist ideology. I hope fascism is wrong but I don't know.

Which doesn't make Braun a stereotypical monster! I am sure that he was a real committed family man without any hypocrisy.

Braun's personal views probably were different from Hitlers. I think that he thought more along the lines of Hobbes in the book 'Leviathan'. Judging from Braun's novel, Braun thought that a state with unlimited power was the ONLY way to bring peace and stability to the world.

Braun thought of manned space travel as the best way of creating Leviathan. If he couldn't make space colonization possible, then the world was screwed anyway. If Leviathan failed, it would be a nuclear war that wouldn't affect HIS children. However, if Leviathan succeeded then he saved the world and his family.

So as long as it didn't endanger HIS family, everything was justified.
 
What you wrote shows the great lengths Braun was willing to go to to continue rocket development. He wanted to launch humanity into outer space. He personally wanted to go to the moon. It didn't matter how many people he would have to step on to get there.

I think the last statement is a little over the top, but the general sentiment is probably accurate. He wanted to put humanity in space. He thought the Nazis would be a valid stepping stone, but they turned out not to be. At the end of the war he risked a lot by loading everything on a truck and driving from Peenemunde to Oberammergau to surrender it to the Americans, relying largely on his status as an SS officer to bluff his way along. He was willing to endure a lengthy prisoner-of-war status in America in order to position himself to be part of NASA. But then in the mid-1970s when it appeared NASA wasn't going to continue manned space exploration on the same footing as before, he was just as willing to abandon them as he was the Nazis.

This would make it very hard to fake being opposed.

He got in trouble with the regime by saying the best use of rocketry was space exploration. Not the thing to say if you were in charge of one of the Third Reich's vengeance-weapon programs.

I am sure that he was a real committed family man without any hypocrisy.

I interviewed one of his daughters, but that was a hard thing for her to talk about. I'm still trying to write that chapter of my book.
 

Back
Top Bottom