I did make a mistake in the post above. The entire electronic surveillance systems of these aircraft carriers, supercomputers and all, has received Apollo Project levels of intellectual investment. For Raytheon alone, revenues in 2018 were 27.1 billion dollars. The revenues of Apollo Project aerospace contractors were of a similar magnitude.
And nope, I don't think fusion is yet worthy of Manhattan Project, or even Apollo Project levels of investment. My opinion of the ITER project is that it should continue to be funded. Maybe it will surprise us, but probably not. It will definitely expose more reasons that fusion power is difficult and expensive, even compared to advanced fission power concepts.
Once upon a time the Tokamak Fusion Test Reactor was also expected to "break even." It's a repeating story with fusion projects.
The only way to quit fossil fuels is to quit fossil fuels and let the cards fall as they may. There is no foreseeable technology that will simply displace them.
There is enough "economically" extractable natural gas to destroy the world as we know it.
Betting the future of the world on technologies that don't yet exist is not wise.
Eventually enthusiasts of solar, wind, and yes, fusion energy, play into the hands of the natural gas industry.
And if I'd been around making policy in the 'fifties and 'sixties we'd have gotten to the moon just fine and done just as much, or even more science. But you are right, maybe not with people.
= new reply since forum marked as read