toolbar Sign Up for's E-mails

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

    Missile Defense

Russian military leaders have expressed concern about US plans for a national missile defense system. Will defense technology be limited by possibilities for a strategic imbalance? Is this just SDI all over again?

Earliest MessagesPrevious MessagesRecent MessagesOutline (1318 previous messages)

almarst-2001 - 02:03pm Mar 22, 2001 EST (#1319 of 1327)

After reading the rshowalt 9/25/00 7:32am let me please to comment on some.

I will start backward, as it seems easier to answer.

The people are scared and have being so since Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Most have seen a movies about those events and seen the consequences. The atmospheric nuclear tests where shown many times to wide public as well. Scary enough.

The disarmament of rogue states is much more difficalt, but probably not entirely impossible, IF ALSO DONE SIMULTANIOUSLY.

The mechanism and sequence of US-Russia massive nuclear force destruction can be worked out, but it is a much harder to do while ensuring simmetry and complete trust of verification, taking in account all mobil platforms and given a vast arsenals and land and see massess involved. The "devil" may be in details, but it may be possible, given sufficient preparations.

However, the main problems remains unsolved:

- A very huge disballance in conventional OFFENSIVE forces, including ofshore air and sea military bases and strategic Air Force and conventional stand-off wearpons.

- Continues verification to prevent construction of a new arms of mass destruction.

- Elimination of other types of non-conventional wearpons, particularely biologicals.

rshowalter - 02:04pm Mar 22, 2001 EST (#1320 of 1327) Delete Message
Robert Showalter

Here is a book that shows social patterns that are essential in US power circles that are VERY different from your own.

OneL: What they really teach you at Harvard Law School by Scott Turow

almarst-2001 - 02:13pm Mar 22, 2001 EST (#1321 of 1327)

And one additional comment.


I still have a feeling you are mistaken about who I am.

Let me make it absolutly clear - I have absolutly no relations whatsoever with any Russian entity, official or otherwise. I am a US Citizen for almost 15 years. I am not even a Russian, but a Jewish.

Sorry, if I disapponted you.


almarst-2001 - 02:14pm Mar 22, 2001 EST (#1322 of 1327)

I wery much appreciated the book reference you provided. Will try to read as much as time will allow.

rshowalter - 02:33pm Mar 22, 2001 EST (#1323 of 1327) Delete Message
Robert Showalter

almarst-2001 3/22/01 2:03pm

That's great progress !

Let me type out just a few things about books, that I have prepared, and then take some time to try to connect what you say to the possiblitity of staffing a "journalistic exercise" to set out, in detail, what a full solution might involve. And what the historical background is.

If that exercise was well done, the nation states concerned might face challenges they could actually surmount. And do so in ways that would seem beautiful to just about everybody concerned.

It seems that the human steps needed to get that effort rolling are workable.

I believe that much progress could be made, both on radically reducing or getting rid of nuclear danger, and getting conventional balances sensible.

rshowalter - 02:36pm Mar 22, 2001 EST (#1324 of 1327) Delete Message
Robert Showalter

Have someone else read the book - and others -- who can then actually talk to the author of the books - so that cultural differences can be ironed out - a step at a time, on a "field of discourse" where the stakes are lower than they are with military matters.

Now, when Russians and Americans start to disagree, about much of anything, the situation explodes into an impasse. We need to get past that.

So such conversations would be "experiments" -- and if a discourse failed, the penalties would not be great, and there could be other conversations.

rshowalter - 02:39pm Mar 22, 2001 EST (#1325 of 1327) Delete Message
Robert Showalter

For example, here are three books, by politicians, that seem to me must be RADICALLY unsatisfactory and incomplete in some ways important to Russian culture - and yet informative. Thinking about what seems strange or ugly about these books, from your pont of view, would be useful, I believe:

Between Hope and History -- by Bill Clinton

Keeping Faith by Jimmy Carter

The Downing Street Years by Margaret Thatcher

Talking to these people about books ought to be considerably easier than discussing the complexities of war and peace. Again, this would only work if the prople involved were willing to spend the time for free - as a status exchange. I bet more than one of these three would be willing to do so.

rshowalter - 02:40pm Mar 22, 2001 EST (#1326 of 1327) Delete Message
Robert Showalter

You don't need to do this. Staff should and could do this.

More Messages Unread Messages Recent Messages (1 following message)

 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 | 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 2001 The New York Times Company