The Curiosity rover....,"water was here"?

I view the probes we're sending to Mars as reconnaissance; sure, they have aims and goals of finding certain minerals - and, perhaps even life - but it's showing us what to expect prior to having boots on the ground...

You clearly have absolutely no idea how scientific research is conducted. It proceeds in small steps so that later research rests on a solid foundation. The rovers are the most brilliant scientific exploration tools that mankind has ever produced, and are the result of centuries of cooperation of many different countries.

We knew that possibly water existed in the poles in the 30's but now we know its plentiful even in regular non polar Martian soil in small quantities; so yes, it is very cool. The more water we find means the more chance that there was life and the easier it will be to set up a small landing station and turn that water into resources for astronauts to survive long haul and spend a lengthy amount of time doing research.

It's not exactly easy to send humans on a several month trip millions of miles away where it takes 4 minutes just to get a message to and then get them back safely... while possible there's really no point since anything humans can achieve there right now a robot can do better.

Curiosity isn't searching for life and was never meant to. I'm fairly convinced there isn't any to be looking for in the first place.

It seems clear that the scientific intentions of the space program and your personal priorities don't easily match up here. Life hunting was never a mission priority for Mars, and the focus is on the evolution of the planet's geology. The facts of the matter are that if you want the best possible chance of finding life past or present then you need to follow the water and until recently we didn't know to what extent it was present or quite what an ancient Mars looked like. When I was a kid, Viking 1 and 2 were it's only visitors and they left more questions than answers. It's incredible just how much we've learned about this planet since the turn of the millennium.

Just plonking a probe down on the surface and hoping to strike it lucky like Viking just isn't going to happen with modern budgetary constraints. Any mission that is eventually going fully equipped for life hunting is going to need to be cleverer than that. Besides, what's the hurry? It's not like the planet is going anywhere.

In terms of the activities of other space programmes, you seem to have forgotten that Roscosmos has been equally capable of putting humans in orbit, and at present is the world's only agency capable of doing so since the shuttle's retirement. Esa laid down it's decision to focus on robotic missions long ago but there are signs that policy is about to change. China is about to undertake a full scale lunar programme with manned landings planned quite soon.

Going to Mars (and surviving long enough to return) is beyond the capabilities of any single nation at present. If NASA is going then it NEEDS Russian and European help. The glory days of the can-do 60s are long gone for the USA and NASA long since realised this, and rarely plans major missions now that don't involve international cooperation.

I would NOT board a rocket to Mars without being 100% sure I could be brought back alive and that the infrastructure is perfect.

That, Sir, takes time, effort and Tax Payer's Dollars.

Mar Curiosity rover has been a huge success, sorry if you don't "get it".

Maybe you should concentrate on getting the words right before you make big rants about what people with more knowledge than you do in making decisions. Your spelling and grammar mistakes and mistakes of fact deflate what few good points you make.

In order for light to exist, Josh, there much exist a form of water.