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?

rshowalter - 10:55am Mar 31, 2001 EST (#1824 of 1827)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Progress: European Union Takes Step Toward Ties With Pyongyang by SUZANNE DALEY http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/31/world/31EURO.html

" In a further measure of its commitment to bolstering the peace effort between South and North Korea, the European Commission said today that it was taking steps toward establishing diplomatic relations with the North before a visit there by a European Union delegation. . . . . .

our State Department is said to be supportive. . .

rshowalter - 11:42am Mar 31, 2001 EST (#1825 of 1827)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

#1801 starts: "There's lot of hard work on this thread, and looking back, a lot of good argument and good writing. Here are some highlights, that I've enjoyed recently." rshowalter 3/30/01 6:33pm Here are more pieces I've enjoyed rereading, since "Dawn Riley and I did a demonstration" rshowalter 2/13/01 4:43pm

Is the arms race still necessary - why not find out the facts, in a way where truth has a chance? rshowalter 2/14/01 1:59pm

Nuclear war would be worse than anything the Germans did in WWII: rshowalter 2/14/01 4:16pm

Human responsiblility for nuclear risks --- from an animal- primate perspective -- edevershed 2/16/01 1:26am

For military function, both offensive and defensive, deception is essential. But for this reason, deception threatens the other side. OPENNESS IS STABILIZING, AND A FORCE FOR PEACE rshowalter 2/17/01 5:46am

Arguments for nuclear "stability" are based on unreal "rational behavior assumptions that don't work under conditions of extreme threat or desperation. rshowalter 2/17/01 1:59pm

Dawn Riley searched the dictionary of military terms under threat , and got 36 entries. Each a http citation, not a clear definiton. .... after nearly half a century of negotiation - gross ambiguity, inconventiently packaged, concerning a key word "threat" ................. Want to try to communicate with an enemy FAST? rshowalter 2/17/01 2:05pm

We need force balances where threats, and logic sequences under threat are STABLE, or involve SURVIVABLE COSTS. ...For this reason, we need to get rid of nuclear weapons, that are prone to instability and involve catastrophic losses. .....The Russians have argued this way for years. rshowalter 2/17/01 2:07pm

Here is a text adaptation of CNN's Special Report, REHEARSING DOOMSDAY ...which aired Sunday, October 15 at 10 p.m. EDT. http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2000/democracy/nuclear/stories/nukes/index.html

I've said that nuclear weapons are militarily useless, corrupting, a clear danger to the safety of the world, and should be taken down. That is, I'm advocating the abolition of one kind of weapon, for practical reasons that are in the essentially universal interest of human beings, whether they be soldiers or civilians. rshowalt 10/27/00 10:48am

The nuclear situation is an impasse from a logically incremental point of view -- it needs redemption, from all points of view, including the military's rshowalter 2/18/01 3:52pm

"As Mr. Rumsfeld himself acknowledged, the present military was built for the cold war, not the threats of tomorrow. " -- Change perserving infrastructure, and treating "losers" sensibly rshowalter 2/18/01 3:53pm

(2 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense