New York Times on the Web Forums Science
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?
(543 previous messages)
- 03:38pm Jan 8, 2001 EST (#544
rshowalter - 01:53pm Jan 8, 2001 EST (#543 of 543)
What ever happened to the blistering crossexamination? The
scientific reasons it wouldn't work?
Cat got your tounge? After all the trouble I went to to write it
out for you?
And I was so looking forward to the science lesson.
It's pretty thin soup, and has nothing to do with whether it
would work, but here's what Gorby has to say:
"Need an example?
It's more than you seem to get around here, shoot.
The expansion of NATO eastward,
Politics. Politicians wanting the Polish vote etc. Nothing to do
with some grand plan. You gotta believe the smart folks in Russia
are well aware of it.
the handling of the Yugoslav crisis,
Well Gorby, you are completely out to lunch here. It was
virtually all of Western Civilization. Most of the rest of the world
too. The most united Europe has ever been in it's entire history by
far. You are letting your predjudice and bigotry get the best of
you. Couldn't have anything to do with race and religion could it?
Just a cooincidence is it?
the military theory and practice of U.S. rearmament --
Sorry Gorby, we have cut our spending rather radically. Probably
why we are finally whipping butt on the global economic stage
including the latest and utterly extravagant
And when Saddam's missle is on the way, and we are wondering if
it will work, I wonder how many Americans will wish we hadn't
extravagantly wasted the money. Perhaps cut some corners.
Anti-Missile National Defense System, which, in turn, is based
on the truly bizarre inotion of so-called "rogue states."
Bizarre huh? How bizarre to think Saddam might use poison gas
against others. How bizarre to think Bin loonie or any of his
followers would want to kill Americans. How bizarre to think a
country like N. Korea, with it's 4 international phone lines and
forced hero worship of a total dictator could possibly act
And, goodness knows, in 20 years when 50 countries would have the
ability to destroy the US, there is no chance whatsoever that they
ever would, even by accident. After all, we know Iraqi engineering
- 03:39pm Jan 8, 2001 EST (#545
At any rate, my analysis stands unrefuted.
Now, why is that?
- 09:46pm Jan 8, 2001 EST (#546
Could it be that I've got some other things to attend to?
- 10:07pm Jan 8, 2001 EST (#547
The irony of it is that if Mighty Mother Russia that was buldin'
Hydrogen Bombs and sending up sattelites 50 years ago is worried
about it, It will work like a charm for Saddam.
Kinda obvious if you think about it, isn't it?
- 10:17pm Jan 8, 2001 EST (#548
Now, we've known since Godel's Incompleteness Theorm in the
thirties there will always be an exception, a loophole in our
axiomatic system. And, of course, Turing's Halting Problem
demonstrates that we can't be sure if the computer can do the
calculations in a pinch. Not to mention Chaitin's full blown
Algorithmic Information Theory, that, among other things, says that
if we ever came across the best plan, it is absolutely impossible
for us to know it.
So despite the cold hard fact that it is impossible to have a
foolproof system, the idea is to make it so difficult, that there is
a high probability of Saddam's missles not getting through.
- 06:07am Jan 9, 2001 EST (#549
A missile defense system that would work, or, as you suggest
would be the best that could be hoped for, very probably work, would
be a good thing. A very good thing.
Worth the negotiating trouble it would cause. I think we'd agree
So the argument to "keep trying" is a good argument.
Like other arguments, it has to stand and fall on technical
details, and on necessarily less than certain judgements.
Our attempts at Star Wars have been falling short, in many, many
ways, for a long time.
I believe that if we put even a tenth as much effort into finding
ways for an effective, enforceable nuclear disarmament, that we
spend on Star Wars, we'd get a much better solution.
My own view, which may be wrong (and you may be privy to all
sorts of information that I have no access to) is that I haven't
seen an antimissile proposal out of the Star Wars (I,... II, ...
III, ....n ) programs that I'd give one chance in 1000 of actually
working in the real, dirty world.
If the odds are anything like that, we ought not to bet too much
or our national security on the success of the program.
New York Times on the Web Forums Science