Forums

toolbar



 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  /

    Missile Defense

Technology has always found its greatest consumer in a nation's war and defense efforts. Since the last attempts at a "Star Wars" defense system, has technology changed considerably enough to make the latest Missile Defense initiatives more successful? Can such an application of science be successful? Is a militarized space inevitable, necessary or impossible?

Read Debates, a new Web-only feature culled from Readers' Opinions, published every Thursday.


Earliest Messages Previous Messages Recent Messages Outline (234 previous messages)

speedbird77 - 03:20am Sep 2, 2000 EST (#235 of 11863)
Osama bin runnin

We have now seen our Commander in Cheat show the entire world that he indeed has no backbone and does not deserve to be commander of the greatest military in the world.

Are there problems with the system, yes, Ill be the first to admit this but does that mean you just throw your hands up and yell uncle? Where would this nation be if everytime we faced a setback, we withdrew and quit!

This is giving great comfort to the Chinese, the Russians, the North Koreans and the Iranians ALL of whom have or will have soon the potential to hurl nuclear warheads at the US mainland. Lets remember, it only takes ONE SINGLE crude warhead to kill millions of Americans. Clinton has now given these nations the signal to continue work on their nuclear programs because the US has no intention of defending its citizens. When I hear stories of "nuclear suitcase" bombs being more of a threat, I just have to laugh. Have any of these jokers who spout such nonsense ever seen a nuclear warhead? Do they realize the technological sophistication that would be needed to carry out such a task?

Probably not. Not one of these nations has the potential to design such miniature warheads but they do have the potential to create large crude warheads and this is what NMD was all about. I would love to see these armchair scientists get a warhead and its associated technology needed to enable the warhead to detonate into this infamous suitcase. In fact, it should be mandated that they prove the "suitcase" theory in order to halt NMD. What a terrible tragedy this announcement was for this great nation.

speedbird77 - 03:24am Sep 2, 2000 EST (#236 of 11863)
Osama bin runnin

beckq:

One battle does not win a war.

neilgiuntoli1 - 11:47am Sep 3, 2000 EST (#237 of 11863)

I have always thought the 'kinetic kill' vehicle (bullet hitting a bullet)was flawed from the onset. There are too many ways to countermeasure this system, decoys among them. I have always thought that, the system should be a space-based array of directed energy and advanced beam generation technologies, meaning that we have the capability to detect a launch, real-time, in 5 to 15 seconds and to terminate it using beam generation weapons. It can be done. I realize it is a political hot button issue, destabilization of other nuclear powers, throwing the concept of MAD out the window,(and it should be, because MAD is mad)etc etc. I personally am against Empire, I do not believe that our nation should be the world's policeman, that is how I personally feel and think, but do not be so naive to think that a nation hostile to the United States would hestitate to launch against IF they felt their geopolitical aims could be achieved by a BM attack. If you have knowledge how the Defense Industry works, President Clinton's deciding to forestall deployment of this flawed for the get system..the kinetic kill system, means nothing.If you look at the BMDO website, they have programs up and funded, that envision technology just as I have described, and will not hestitate to operate under a black budget. If you remember correctly, President Clinton was shocked to learn that the NRO(National Reconaissance Office) had erected a $350 million dollar facility in Maryland, and he knew nothing about it, until the day they cut the ribbon. Now, we have a futile war being waged here and abroad called the "War on Drugs", costing $40 bln a year, clearly being lost and about to turn Colombia into another quagmire, this war is also jailing a whole generation of African-American men, ethnic cleansing within our borders, its a crime, and its a national tragedy. A conflict without victory, that is whittling at all our freedoms and turning this nation to a police state, BUT, to ignore Missile Defense would be a second tragedy, when it came time to fund the "Manhattan Project" during WW2, they realized , they could NOT afford to fund it, in my personal opinion, I believe this effort carries such an urgency.

More Messages Recent Messages (11626 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Email to Sysop  Your Preferences

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  / Missile Defense







Home | Site Index | Site Search | Forums | Archives | Shopping

News | Business | International | National | New York Region | NYT Front Page | Obituaries | Politics | Quick News | Sports | Science | Technology/Internet | Weather
Editorial | Op-Ed

Features | Arts | Automobiles | Books | Cartoons | Crossword | Games | Job Market | Living | Magazine | Real Estate | Travel | Week in Review

Help/Feedback | Classifieds | Services | New York Today

Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company