From all that Chris posted in the past, it's obvious that Chris is a supporter of Zubrin. One of the tenets of "A Case for Mars" is that returning to the Moon is a bad idea that distracts from the idea of senting crew to Mars. The simple fact is that Zubrin plan as described won't work. It wouldn't have worked when it was proposed, and now on top of this, it's simply outdated. Trying to get NASA to build a large booster is about the same as trying to bring back the Soviet Union- it's simply not going to happen.
But as far as the Ten Reasons, I think there is really just one reason. The reason we should return to the Moon is to determine whether there is commerically minable water. If the Moon does NOT have minable water deposits, then the question might become, "where else could there minable resources in the space environment". We know that Mars has relatively large quantities of water [or that Mercury could have fairly sizable quantities of water]. Having large quantities of water near the surface or even easily drilled for and gotten as a liquid, does not neccessarily mean that Mars has minable water in the sense that the Moon could have minable water. Minable water on the Moon, would allow one to make rocket fuel. This rocket fuel can be used to get off the moon or travel around on the Moon, but more importantly in term of economics, the water [or rocket fuel] can be can be exported from the Moon, so that this rocket fuel can used to land on the Moon or be used to get anywhere in the solar system- such as Mars, asteroids, Venus, Mercury, or outer planets. With lunar water made into rocket fuel at Earth/Moon L-1, getting to the lunar surface is nearly as easy as getting to LEO. And there are many advantages [or "reasons"] of being able to get to the Lunar surface as compared LEO, such as tourism, mining, telescopes, a variety science objectives, etc.