We do not have hundreds of millions starving every day.
And if we did, we don't have a large portion of industrialized/militarized missions starving every day anway.
We'd send the best of the best, hand picked, with the best tech we can build.
It's fine if you believe we should not go (but I disagree), but the state of the world is not evidence of failure of the mission.
> We do not have hundreds of millions starving every day.
Then maybe it's time you stop being ignorant. It's not even hard to google. Start with the WHO, over 700 million people faced hunger and malnutrition in 2023. [1] And I'm not particularly interested in how you will try to nitpick your way out of that. It's so easy in the west and in upper classes of the developing world to close your eyes to this.
> And if we did, we don't have a large portion of industrialized/militarized missions starving every day anway. We'd send the best of the best, hand picked, with the best tech we can build.
Initially, sure. But that's not what I was talking about. Eventually you want to build a civilization there, right? Eventually you have millions there. And it's hard to see how you will be able to organize a society in large scale in a way that does not have the problems humankind currently has if you can't even fix that here which compared to all other planets is a nature paradise. Even after a thermonuclear war, earth is easier to live on than any other planet in this solar system. Time to leave your scifi bubble if you believe otherwise.
> It's fine if you believe we should not go (but I disagree), but the state of the world is not evidence of failure of the mission.
The state of the world is evidence of failure of a mission that is much easier than building a civilization on another planet.
It's fine if you believe we should not go (but I disagree), but the state of the world is not evidence of failure of the mission.