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?** Star Wars *** Star Wars *** Star Wars *** Corporate Welfare
for Republican Cronies. Any guesses how much Reagan/Bush spent on
this with NO RESULTS?
Mutually Assured Destruction is the only proven technology that
truly works. Proper intelligence with Isreali-like assurance that
any threats will be destroyed preemptively is certainly cheaper and
more productive than a new round of ballistic blackmail. Of course,
looking a the state of the current intelligence(sic) community,
which failed to see the fall of the Soviet Union, failed to see the
Indian nuclear breakout, etc, the argument for some machine-based
deterrent sounds appealing.
Naturally the new Prez would like machines to tackle this job. He
certainly trust machines to count missiles/ballots better than
humans. Can't wait 'til they get a system running like the Aeigis
system on American warships that shot down the Iranian civilian jet.
Or the Russians shootingdown the Korean Airlines jet...doesn't give
the flying public the warm and fuzzies, but make those military
contractors just flush with all this American budget surplus.
- 12:56pm Jan 12, 2001 EST (#570
Science/Health Forums Host
Rumsfeld urges a plan to protect satellites from enemy attack.
See the article.
Michael Scott Armel
- 11:19pm Jan 12, 2001 EST (#571
India and Pakistan
Meeting re nuclea restraint policy
had 3 wars in past years
- 11:22pm Jan 12, 2001 EST (#572
One way of protecting satallites might be to make them
'international' rather than national communications highways.
Other systems -- older methods are also being modelled and
revised -- so that if the Sats are knocked out other systems can
- 01:05am Jan 13, 2001 EST (#573
- 11:15am Jan 13, 2001 EST (#574
- 06:33am Jan 16, 2001 EST (#575
Right answers, that get to hardware that actually works, are an
obligation, a sacred trust. http://www.nytimes.com/2001/01/16/science/16COYL.html
Spending hundreds of billions of dollars (and corrupting our
contractors, with pressures to evade technical truth) on hardware
nowhere close to working, that may never work, is a disservice to
- 07:15am Jan 22, 2001 EST (#576
Guardian Unlimited Special: SON OF STAR WARS by Neil
Perry Thursday January 18, 2001 http://guardianunlimited.co.uk/netnotes/article/0,6729,421543,00.html
contains the following, with much cited and available on line.
"William Hague has backed George W Bush's plans for a national
missile defence system. Here's our guide to the best sites on
Dubya's pet project
"1. It all began with Ronald Reagan and his
ambitious (some would say fantastic) 1983 plan for a space-borne
missile defence system, known as the strategic defence initative,
but quickly dubbed Star Wars.
"2. The idea was immediately rubbished by many.
Russia, fearing a nuclear attack, was particularly unhappy about
"3. There was also concern that the lasers Star
Wars would employ to shoot down incoming nuclear missiles could
themselves be used as weapons.
"4. Star Wars transformed into a
missile-to-missile system, theatre high altitude area defence
(THAAD), rather than Reagan's space laser fantasy. The system
relied heavily on America's bases in the UK, Fylingdales and
Menwith Hill in the Yorkshire Dales.
"5. The problem was, after an obscene amount of
money was spent on the project, Star Wars still didn't work. To
prove otherwise, the Pentagon allegedly rigged some tests.
"6. But some companies, such as Lockheed Martin,
weren't worried, as Star Wars was very good for business.
"7. Enthusiasm for the whole project slowly waned
throughout the 90s, until President Clinton decided to revive the
idea. Predictably, his decision was also ridiculed.
"8. Although some people still thought it was a
"9. With the ascent of George W Bush, Star Wars -
or the Son Of - is back on the agenda, now known as national
"10. William Hague is behind the plan all the way.
But is Tony Blair?
- 07:18am Jan 22, 2001 EST (#577
The Guardian/Observer has decided that it is against the
"Star Wars" initiative, and this decision may color the collection
of news and comment it presents.
But I would like to see a similarly historical and detailed
coverage of "Star Wars" 1, 2, 3, .... N from a pro Star Wars
Can such a case be set out?
New York Times on the Web Forums Science