>>>The Shuttle is essential for the delivery of the Columbus module to the ISS and the Japanese JEM module. And the HST repair mission too needs the Shuttle.<<<<

Are any of those essential enough to justify:

1) $600 million dollar per flight missions?
2) NASA's continuing to compete against potential private sector initiatives?

Next:

>>>>But isn't refusing to use the Shuttle again contributing to the risk averse mentality?<<<

Isn't encouraging genuinely entrepreneurial outsourcing the kind of risk that we need to take with NASA?

Next:

>>>It prooves once again France was right to build the Ariane rocket family.<<<

Is there anything wrong with having more and more competitors in a flagrantly overpriced sector?