> There is water (ice) on the moon at the poles and carbon in the rocks so it would be possible to make rocket fuel

Both requiring advanced, energy-intensive chemistry to extract small amounts of water and trace amounts of carbon. All running on specialised gear built out of elements difficult to find on the Moon. Compare that to heating a fluid containing 95% CO2 to 400 degrees C and running it over a catalyst which makes up over 5% of Martian soil (aluminium).

> Want [sic] to colonise Mars does not mean you should avoid the moon.

There's value in focus. Mars is the easier and superior target, given present technology and Elon's goals. Someone else can focus on the Moon if they want to.

I am not sure Mars is the easier target given how much further it is up the gravity well, but certainly Elon is welcome to focus on whatever he wants. I was just making the point that the Moon is able to be used as a source of rocket fuel if so desired and in my opinion it is a worthy target.

Interesting point. Do you think Elon Musk would ever create a expedition to the Moon even though he's so focused on Mars right now? I always thought he would've tried at least once

Von Braun wanted to go to Mars too, but ended up choosing the Moon as being the more viable option.

Yeah, in the 60s when nearly every occurrence in space was a "world first"

> Want to colonise Mars does not mean you should avoid the moon.

But does going to the moon do anything to further the cause of colonising Mars? Elon has specific goals he is pursuing. Going to the moon would consume resources that could otherwise be used going to Mars, and there's nothing useful he could do on the moon that would help him in his actual goals.