[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 (1344 previous messages)

almarst-2001 - 10:20pm Mar 22, 2001 EST (#1345 of 11890)

In my view, the 72 days and nights of bombing of Serbia had the very dramatic and negative effect on international relations, arms race and the American image. For me, this one episode was sufficient to completely chenge my oppinion on Clinton's presidency.

Little did I care about his personal affairs, even I think it was very wrong, but for the different reason - he put the president of the greatest superpower in a danger to be blackmailed. This is absolutly recless and in my view, deserve impeachement.

But to bomb and destroy the civilian infrustructure of a country, killing at least 500 civilians and causing the direct damage of about $60bn, dropping more bombs then this country received during WWII was plainly criminal.

This was a turning point when a Post-Cold War good will was lost. And not just of Russia.

rshowalter - 10:21pm Mar 22, 2001 EST (#1346 of 11890)
Robert Showalter

Some old but powerful work, based on MArkov chains, used in classified machine translation work in both our countries, when combined with LSA (latent semantic analysis) would improve the art in this regard - and current LSA, with good information collection, is already very good.

Soon, people are going to have to hide almost everything if they are going to have complex operations go undetected.

Hard to do.

rshowalter - 10:24pm Mar 22, 2001 EST (#1347 of 11890)
Robert Showalter

almarst_2001 , America, as a nation, needs to be awkened to the horrors of bombing. We're willing to do it when there's no adequate justification. I wish I could find extenuating circumstances here - but don't see any.

rshowalter - 10:43pm Mar 22, 2001 EST (#1348 of 11890)
Robert Showalter

Microsoft warned users Thursday that someone posing as a company employee had obtained access to digital certificates that could be used to pose as the software giant and deliver a computer virus.

almarst-2001 - 10:46pm Mar 22, 2001 EST (#1349 of 11890)

That event clearly illustrated the need to ensure that aggression has to have consequences for agressor. That realisation makes nuclear disarmament at current disballance of conventional power unrealistic.

Not incidently, just after coming to power (again for the same reason), Putin modified the Russian military doctrine to permit the first use of a tactical nuclear wearpons.

If not for this war, may be even American NMD would be seen much more favorably, rather then an attempt to neutralise the deterrent one may have against overhelming US conventional military.

rshowalter - 10:50pm Mar 22, 2001 EST (#1350 of 11890)
Robert Showalter

We need to look, carefully, at how "overwhelming" that US military is, in the ways that matter.

NO ONE can reasonably be asked to surrender real security. A workable deal must increase REAL security for all concerned, taking everything into account.

I think, with this well remembered, nuclear disarmament is practical. Soon.

rshowalter - 10:51pm Mar 22, 2001 EST (#1351 of 11890)
Robert Showalter

Just an aside, but not without interest:

Supersecret NSA Said Falling Behind in Tech Advances - - By REUTERS

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. National Security Agency, which uses satellites and electronic listening posts to gather intelligence globally, is falling behind in technology, causing deep concern .....

Rep. Porter Goss, the Florida Republican who chairs the panel, said the NSA, once a leader in technology, is now lagging behind the fast pace of advances and is unable to cover all necessary targets for gathering information and data.

  • *********

    With the patterns of secrecy these folks use, with "need to know barriers" and AN ALMOST INCREDIBLE OBSTRUCTION OF CHECKING PROCEDURES -- they are doomed to fall FARTHER and FARTHER behind - and up against a competent force, they'd look like clowns.

    A transition to patterns that do MUCH MORE IN CLEAR at many levels is going to be necessary.

    rshowalter - 10:53pm Mar 22, 2001 EST (#1352 of 11890)
    Robert Showalter

    If full nuclear disarmament isn't achievable, reductions, and improvements in controls, that keep the world intact certainly ought to be. The current levels and controls are just nuts.

    lunarchick - 11:06pm Mar 22, 2001 EST (#1353 of 11890)

    I fipped through back posts.


    This is a site for contrived controvacy, yet seems to have a following that elevates Mrs"w"Bush to a pedestal while thrashing Mrs"wj"Clinton.

    When Showalter mentioned the 10,000 words heard in a day .... then 'concepts' have to be included. Words alone are 'dictionary' listings.

    Congratulations on becoming a Grandparent Alex, all the more reason for you to work for peace.

    On the culture of lying 1293. The newspapers depend on business and commerce for advertising revenue and propietors must have linked more with this aspect of income than with general readerships.

    More Messages Recent Messages (10537 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