New York Times on the Web



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

    Missile Defense

Nazi engineer and Disney space advisor Wernher Von Braun helped give us rocket science. Today, the legacy of military aeronautics has many manifestations from SDI to advanced ballistic missiles. Now there is a controversial push for a new missile defense system. What will be the role of missile defense in the new geopolitical climate and in the new scientific era?

Earliest MessagesPrevious MessagesRecent MessagesOutline (299 previous messages)

rshowalt - 04:58pm Sep 25, 2000 EDT (#300 of 396)

There's something perverse going on when a nation like India

1) can't figure out how to make its economy work


2) commits scarce resources to nuclear weapons, and takes PRIDE in them.

They're imitating the worst American examples, not the best.

I'm gonna slow down and have a cup of coffee, thank you ..... why don't you try for something longer, and more coherent, or are we just sparring so that I may be exhausted?

beckq - 05:03pm Sep 25, 2000 EDT (#301 of 396)

"American foreign policy would work better if we could be clearer in our internal and external signals"

  • Quite true thats why America makes it quite clear and indicates that it will use nuclear weapons if it feels it needs to.

    rshowalt - 05:15pm Sep 25, 2000 EDT (#302 of 396)

    If anybody has any evidence at all that a "graded" use of nuclear power actually works, I'd like to hear it. I think you're toying with tactics that would destroy the world.

    Have you ever checked? Could you check? Do you know anybody who might conveivably check? How?

    Unless you have answers here, you're in a morally indefensible, logically indefensible position, and you've put the United States, and the world, in grave danger.

    It would be safer, to remove nuclear weapons, and remove that danger.

    rshowalt - 05:17pm Sep 25, 2000 EDT (#303 of 396)

    If you don't pause here, and think about what you're doing, you ought to.

    rshowalt - 05:28pm Sep 25, 2000 EDT (#304 of 396)

    I'd be grateful for a chance to come before you, or one or more of your representatives, and explain, in detail, with documentation and ways to check, how dangerous this situation is. Especially if a good reporter, and a videotape record, were there so what was said was clear.

    Some mistakes have been made, and you and I weren't very old when they were made. They can be fixed. A lot of things would improve if this were done. They are American mistakes, and Americans, and American leaders, have to fix them.

    kalter.rauch - 06:32am Sep 26, 2000 EDT (#305 of 396)
    Earth vs <^> <^> <^>

    ESP is real after all......

    Just before crashing yesterday I tarried awhile at this forum, but I was all out of gas to throw on the fire......

    rshowalt......I'm sure your passionate pleas leave bleeding hearts aflutter in English tea parties but you'll have to prove why it isn't better to be dead than a slave....... You'll Wish you had Nukes when 1 Billion Red Chinese make their move......Putting the genie back in the bottle is no more possible in reality than it is in legend. It's too late to wonder whether man is "wise enough" to handle H-bombs. The only way to turn back the clock now is to impose a ruthless new order......something along the lines of the Khmer's the knowledge that holds the danger. Those who make use of the Knowledge...and those who pass the Knowledge to a new generation must be liquidated......

    Ridiculous, of course......and so is "getting rid of" nuclear weapons. On the contrary, America is fortunate to possess such Power, and a Science which may indeed deliver even Greater Might unto her Aegis.

    rshowalt - 07:57am Sep 26, 2000 EDT (#306 of 396)

    I stand by my argument. Getting rid of nuclear weapons would be technically easy. The only hard part is looking at them straight, with minds and hearts, and with what Dickens called "disciplined hearts" and seeing to it that nuclear weapons are never made and used again.

    Human nature is plenty dark enough as it stands. We can kill each other, hurt each other, and fend each other off, plenty of different ways. We don't need nuclear weapons. We're dangerous, as we stand, without them.

    I think we should rid the world of nuclear weapons by Christmas 2000, and I think we should. It would be a date to remember, for as long as there were people in the world.

    The man with more skills for accomplishing that, and the man best placed for accomplishing that, is William Jefferson Clinton. Everybody knows he's smart enough, and dangerous enough, to actually get it done if he wanted to. I hope he wants to.

    rshowalt - 10:15am Sep 26, 2000 EDT (#307 of 396)

    Here's a great poem about nuclear war, as it actually is - uncontrolled. deadlosss "Favorite Poetry" 9/26/00 7:55am

    lunarchick - 08:25pm Sep 26, 2000 EDT (#308 of 396)
    Barrier Reef - not the place4 - NUKE SUBs !

    Interesting how Civil Defence had programs in the lateFiftiesSixites to lead us to the innermost sanctum of the home where we had stores and provisions to sit out an attack. Realisation that an attack was a last goodbye dawned ... they cut their programs. There is nothing civil about nuclear attacks.

    rshowalt - 05:04am Sep 27, 2000 EDT (#309 of 396)

    rshowalt "Science in the News" 9/27/00 5:00am

    More Messages Unread Messages Recent Messages (87 following messages)

     Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Post Message
     E-mail to Sysop  Your Preferences

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

  • Home | Site Index | Site Search | Forums | Archives | Marketplace

    Quick News | Page One Plus | International | National/N.Y. | Business | Technology | Science | Sports | Weather | Editorial | Op-Ed | Arts | Automobiles | Books | Diversions | Job Market | Real Estate | Travel

    Feedback | Classifieds | Services | New York Today

    Copyright 2000 The New York Times Company