Haven't heard good arguments for Mars over the Moon? Then you haven't looked. The Moon is pitifully resource poor compared to Mars and the lunar He3 resource issue is ludicrous near term. We still haven't beaten the fussion issues that He3 makes worse. We could have a self sustaining research base on Mars long before mining He3 has any practical value. The Moon is certainly a better tourist destination and like all tourist destinations such places should be built with private capital. NASA should provide assistance through help in reducing launch costs IMO, but a lot of the "space industrialists" spurn NASA's help in public, then beg for it in private (ie NASA is slow and moribound in public, then pelase give me a launch contract in private).

My major dissappointment with Bush's plan is its seeming abandonment of CATS. Given that lapse of strategic thinking it is no surprise that somehow the relative importance on Mars and the Moon also got fouled up. I see the Moon becoming the next LEO/ISS with hundreds of billions spent for little return or technological advancement. The Apollo program pushed technology by pushing the envelope. Returning to the Moon to stay does little to push the envelope after decades of space stations and already having been there. Even Mars would push the envelope far less than the Apollo program did because we are much farther along in being prepared to go to Mars than the Moon. It could provide the impetus in several key technology areas which the Moon would either not need or have less driving force for:

artificial gravity (not required, but highly desirable)
radiation protection (maybe not required, but certainly highly desirable)
in-situ resource utilization (required under any reasonable scenario)
long duration space suits
advanced proipulsion systems (not required, but highly desirable)

As for science there is no doubt Mars has far more to offer in terms of comparative planetology. It also has a lot to offer in evaluating the possibilities of life elsewhere whether or not it exists on Mars. We may find it exists there or establish that the requirements for life require more than Mars ever had to offer contrary to most current expectations. As for the theory that UFO's void interest in life on Mars, that requires ignoring the obvious public interest in life on Mars. Theories that ignore facts are pretty silly.

The distance issue is bogus. Space disaster after space disaster has shown the speed of disasters in space is too great for help to be likely even from Earth to LEO. We have'nt lost anyone outside of LEO and we've never made a rescue in a true emergency through resupply. Mars has far more basic resources than the Moon and basic resources like food and water can be provided on Mars far more easily than the Moon.

Regards,
Mark