I agree Gateway is putting the cart before the horse. I just think once there is a real, permanent presence on the moon then ultimately then a space station in lunar orbit will follow, only likely much larger than Gateway. If there is an expansive human presence on the moon many decades from now that includes heavy manufacturing, then eventually it could become a jump off point for deeper space missions. Certainly no time soon.

I posted an article a while back about potential human presence on the moon. Its premise was, can you live off the land and how are you paying?

If you can both use local resources and do something economically useful, then you can build space settlements and get a permanent human presence on the moon. If you can do something economically useful but are still dependent on earth for supplies, it would be like a North Sea oil rig. It would generate an economic return, but people would still have to come home to Earth because the environment can’t support life long term. If you need taxpayer support and can’t live off the land either, it might be like McMurdo station in Antarctica where you’ll have science stations but no self sustaining presence, and be entirely dependent on the whims of government budget makers.

Or it could be like Mt Everest, a place people go to take pictures but no one lives there. That is, no one lives on the mountain, but there are people who live at the base of Mt Everest and make money off the tourism there. There are many places in the world that produce nothing but their entire economy is based on tourism.

One way or another, the moon is big and it's close. I’m pretty confident we’ll find the ice deposits that will ultimately allow the living off the land scenario. And if nothing else tourism will make a human presence there profitable.