I think the biggest hint, was the phrase "forward base"...because they already have bases on the "backside" of the moon. So it was to be used in conjunction with....

maybe?

I can't see how a base on the moon would help us thwart an alien attack unless they decided to do flybys of the moon on the way to earth, which is not necessary by any stretch of the imagination.

All it could really achieve is to stop the ET's from creating a base on a particular area of the moons surface... taking into consideration that they wouldn't just render the facility we built useless immediately.

Hundreds of armed satellite's around the earth would be the best way to put a dent in their plans if we found ourselves in such a situation IMHO.

IRM

...or maybe they want a base on the moon to fight spy satellites from Russia and China?

Or is that to logical?

Wow, certainly thought provoking at any rate given the nature of the gentleman's former job titles. A base on the moon would be potentially advantageous for construction and launching of craft since the gravity is lower, but as a defensive outpost, I'm not sure what to make of the idea.

Incidentally, I believe the term forward base is an actual military term denoting a base of operations established nearer to a combat theater for deployment of personnel and machinery, though someone better versed in military terminology could correct me if I am wrong.

Definitely read Col. Phil Corso's Book, "The Day After Roswell" -I loaned this book to a skeptic friend of mine, who afterward became an avid believer in government cover-ups and extraterrestrial visitations to this planet. It details how the United States and the USSR partnered to defeat what may have become an hostile extraterrestrial invasion. Not science fiction! My understanding is that Col. Corso had this book published after he passed away, so as to avoid any legal conflicts with the US government, yet I don't know if that is fact or not. In any event, it is a great, first hand account of the Roswell cover-up and more.

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
...or maybe they want a base on the moon to fight spy satellites from Russia and China?

Or is that to logical?

ROFL!

Given the distance from the moon to earth, that's completely illogical!

IRM

..LOL

Did you watch this video? this guy doesnt claim to have any INSIDE knowledge.

To summarize the whole video the guy basiclly said he read a few books, believes in UFOs now , and thats what he thinks the moon base is for. WOW.

dosent suprise me...
its the only place he probably dosent have a base so why not....

actually....in a few weeks time he has no say so all is good

For what I can see the former Minister of defense for Canada is just speculating that Aliens exist based on other people's works, just like all of us here. I thought that he had irrefutable proof that the U.S. was going to built a base on the moon for Alien defense purpose.

William Cooper stated in his book "be hold a pale horse" that the U.S. had already engaged Aliens or UFOs in fight and the result was of a 10 year old boy fighting Mike Tyson.

Of course, the Minister could be holding back to protect his real sources and/or even the government of Canada itself.

BTW... Did you guys notice the way the person doing the interview was dressing? Either bad taste or trying to make a statement. Also, he said that MOST people don't believe in Alien...NLP anyone?

If he had actual goverment proof that would be one thing but he doesn't. Sheer speculation across the board. Aside from thwarting alien attacks the moon is also a logical jumping off point for further exploration of our Solar system and we do want to go to Mars.

In theory Aliens could easily avoid the Moon should they so choose, gosh hasn't anyone watched Star Trek, Just park your Orbit on the other side of the planet-DUH.

All he is doing is trying to ease the public's mind for the disclosure of something that ALREADY has been there for a long time. Then make it look like they just started building it up...

It's that simple.

Not really weighing in on Mr. Hallyer's assertions, but just to suggest from an astronomer/engineering perspective:

There are a great many advantages to constructing a military outpost on the moon (though a better idea would be to construct at least two bases, one in each hemisphere to have 24/7 360-degree scanning capabilities).

One advantage would be the ability to monitor the near-space vacuum with much greater resolution and operational efficiency and with far less interference from such things as radio noise, atmospheric obstructions, political enemies and a nosy public, etc.

Another great advantage would be the ability to detect and identify any anomalous activity at a greater relative distance such that time to weigh and act upon a response strategy is maximized. At ~224,000 thousand miles, the distance between the earth and the moon is just a tiny fraction of the space between other celestial objects in the solar system. The average distance to the sun, at 93 million miles (150 million kilometers) by comparison is immensely greater and is still just a relatively short distance relative to the outer planets. Therefore, a base on the moon is not much different than a base on earth would be when considering distances in the solar system.

Perhaps the greatest advantage would be the far lower cost of maintaining a defensive posture from one or more outposts on the moon than on earth. The engineering and, (consequently then, of course) practical expense of forcing tiny payloads through the earth's atmosphere and strong gravitational pull are exorbitant. It would be like trying to attack Godzilla with spitballs and rubber bands. You simply can't effectively, quickly, or numerically succeed by dragging millions of gallons of liquid propellant out to a launch pad over several weeks or months (if you're good and you're lucky and you're very wealthy), hoist a little peeshooter on the top and then expect to "win" anything. What if there is more than one or two incoming hostiles? What if there are dozens, or hundreds?

The moon allows for rapid deployment of small, nimble, easily constructed, easily maintained, efficiently equipped defensive craft and their support structure. Yes, it will be (is?) ridiculously expensive to build.

But once completed, the ability to monitor from great distances and take potential action against any threat is magnified tremendously.

Keep in mind that there may be "other" peripheral uses for such a base: scientific research, asteroid monitoring/defense, exploration, resource extraction just to name a few...

OK, enough for now - just my opinion. Interesting video, though I agree with some that the validity of the source is honorable perhaps, but not yet verifiable. And I get the impression that Mr. Hellyer has his own agenda - which may also be of noble intent. Not sure - just saying...

Anyway - thanks for the thought experiment if nothing else...

Yup I read into the topic quite abit over the past few years, seems like a possible plan of action, setting up a defense station on our moon, but really why shoot at random alien crafts if they haven't shot at us first... doesn't give us a good image...

its obvious theirs unexplained objects flying around our planet and they wouldn't take steps like this if there wasn't a reason, but we have seen absolutely nothing that looks like a threat from space, so why set up defense turrets on the moon, if any alien was smart enough to travel here, they'd pick up on that right away and immediately view earth as a threat...

whatever bush is ridiculous with his ways