New York Times on the Web Forums Science
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?
(1839 previous messages)
- 03:23pm Mar 31, 2001 EST (#1840
Some things take discussion and staff work. So that real people
can have enough time, and see things from enough angles, and ask
enough questions, to come to workable, comfortable solutions.
Perhaps something along the following lines might be workable.
3/12/01 2:17pm "It seems that nobody has
"It seems that nobody has anwers to our most basic questions
about nuclear weapons, then the world needs them. . . . Answers can
be gotten by press people -- more might be accomplished after these
answers were thrashed out.
" Establishing FACTS beyond reasonable doubt -
and explaining these facts very broadly.
" Crafting a fully workable, fully complete,
fully explained "draft treaty proposal" for nuclear disarmament
and a more militarily stable world. Such drafting would, at the
least, make for stunningly good journalism -- that could be widely
syndicated among papers. Useful as that would be, I think the
drafting would serve a much more useful purpose. That purpose
would be actually getting the points that need to be worked out
for nuclear disarmament set out coherently - - to a level where
closure actually occurs. That would involve a great deal of staff
work done coherently, quickly, and in coordinated fashion.
"work . . . . done IN PUBLIC --( without pseudonyms) - say if
some Moscow Times staff, and people from a couple of US papers, some
Guardian staff, and people from some interested governments, started
an OPEN dialog together.
With "shadow government" teams for nonparticipants if necessary.
There are plenty of distinguished, proven people who would
probably be available it this were being reasonably done. Many
people care, and care a lot, about these issues.
Something along those lines might actually get the key facts
straight, and get those facts widely enough understood that the VERY
ugly impasse of the last decade might come to be clarified, and
resolved to a form better than the terrifying and ugly situation we
This might be difficult. But since we know that "alternatives"
such as anti-missile defense don't work at all, it seems well worth
And a lot of lies could be swept away.
- 03:30pm Mar 31, 2001 EST (#1841
Any world leader, any country, any interest group, could
participate. No world leader, no country, no interest group, should
be let off with an assertion based on no more than bald statement.
On the internet, a great deal could be established, before
witnesses, pretty quickly.
There may be "many different points of view" but on key facts,
there are many fewer when people are using their real names, the
statements are public, and impartial people can be asked to judge
facts that are in dispute.
- 03:32pm Mar 31, 2001 EST (#1842
Missile test firing : Mexico
2 patriots intercept incoming balistic
upgraded version of patriot missile (early Nineties)
- 03:34pm Mar 31, 2001 EST (#1843
>Albanians were saved from extermination
should read AlbanianOILfields were 'saved' from
Russian control that was deflected to American control
I honestly don't think any of the NATO countries benefitted
economically from the war.
seems the Yugo stuff was an 'economic - trade war'
and not about political idealism and democracy and freedom and all
I'm pretty sure it was a humanitarian mission - you can justify
the cost of mobilising troops and the weaponry used in terms of
gaining trade with Kosavo. 'Trade' would have suggested peace with
the bigger economy Serbia was better.
A Yugoslavian said to me re when in the city under
" we listened to the news at 7pm .. we didn't
understand what was being said ... later the news was put out in 3
languages ... we listened ... we still didn't understand what was
being said ... what was the war about? "
The causes are complex and state television probably didn't say
the western line, so contadictory messages to Serbs seems likely.
Addition to the psycholgical trashing of hundreds
and thousands of people who had lived side by side and
intermarried in the melting pot .... the people within that war
'didn't know' what the stench of death, and emotional wrenching,
was all about !!
But Mr. Milosevic was killed Albanians and forcing them out of
their homes before the war! Surely we had to intervene to prevent
'ethnic cleansing'. The idea that NATO caused the interethnic
problems is strange - NATO attempted to prevent a repeat of Bosnia's
ethnic cleansing policy that occurred after UN forces refused to
engage those carrying out the crimes.
It was about GREED and ugliness !!!
The people needed 'paperwork solutions' they
needed leadership .. they needed a regular future!
I agree, but I don't think Mr. Miloservic would have been
persuaded by further diplomacy: the EU had already placed a large
economy-damaging trade embargo and other countries were following
suit. He'd probably just ignore the pressure and finish off the
Inactivity may have been worse that the casulties the Serbs and
Albanians suffered during the campaign.
- 03:38pm Mar 31, 2001 EST (#1844
Slobo == a greedy 'nut'
This guy diverted $4Billion
He, his wife, and thugs:
targeted and killed people
(including an editor of a 'free democratic' newspaper)
He may have acted as a greedy opportunist.
Can YOU list what the war was actually about, following the
vacuum left by Tito, and the fall of the Berlin wall, and fall in
revenues to Yugo from both USA and USSR
New York Times on the Web Forums Science