Forums

toolbar



 [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 (10944 previous messages)

lchic - 08:05pm Jan 21, 2002 EST (#10945 of 10953)

Decal

    Computer printed decals are now the hot item in the graphics industry. We possess the capabilities to computer print on vinyl in a fraction of the time it takes to screen print. This technology is extremely beneficial when it comes printing items such as Federal Highway Inspection decals, Wide Turn decals, Hazardous Material decals, and other decals essential to the business world. see

gisterme - 08:11pm Jan 21, 2002 EST (#10946 of 10953)

rshow55 1/20/02 7:54pm

"..."In good design, one of the first things you do (and Kelly Johnson was clear about this) is get clear about what CANNOT be done..."

What cannot be done with regards to BMD is just what you are least clear about, Robert.

gisterme - 08:41pm Jan 21, 2002 EST (#10947 of 10953)

rshow55 1/21/02 7:28pm

"...Because of who you are, and the amount of government effort you've expended, your opinion, and the things you say and have said, aren't irrelevant..."

Ha ha ha ha ha he he hmmm. You're a gas, Robert. You know I have nothing to do with the government; however, I'm glad you think so highly of my humble opinion. :-) I must confess, your persistant silliness does make me laugh during a difficult time in my life. That much is welcome.

"...I wonder how many responsible people could imagine that sort of thing? Gisterme, I'm amazed, given your illustrious background, at the anti-intellectual stance you're taking...."

You should go into the comedy field, Robert! Maybe you could get a job as a writer for Leno or Letterman!

Are you saying I'm taking an anti-intellectual stance because I can imagine more zeros in front of the decimal point for the output power of a hypothetical, imaginary, tuneable laser than you can imagine nines behind the decimal point for the relfectivity index of a hypothetical, imaginary, tuneable decal?

Seems more like you're the one who's being anti-intllectual here, Robert. Since when have intellectuals become those who have less imagination than others? I do have to admit that a tuneable decal calls for a bit more imagination than the tuneable laser. Maybe you should take some of your own advice about Thomas Edison's methods WRT the decal.

lchic - 08:43pm Jan 21, 2002 EST (#10948 of 10953)

    "just continued living with mom and dad and working at McDonand's"
McD's people are considered to be 'army' trained in the real world .. there's a whole corps of them .. supposedly very capable and very much in demand.

Supposing McD's determined they'd run a 'Get Nukes Down' campaigne .. they'd do it! They market a get nukes down party-pack ... incorporate a decal-rocket and hammer. Child takes hammer from pack - whacks decal-rocket on the 'nose' .. it crumbles .. the child 'saves the world from total destruction' .. and gets a bonus token towards another major unmet need.

Put the US army and the McD corps in a line -- the D's would out whip-it, out flank it, incorporate a Quality factor and have 'actual/real' audits to take to their Summer convention that showed where every nickle and dime came from and went to.

Odds are the 'CREATIVE ACCOUNTING' employed in relation to MD is more doubtful than Ronald McD's bottom line. There Ron divies up the takings, noting his loud suits, i'd venture him to be quite an artist assisting MiriumWebster to create McD ephemera ... Midnight in Moscow with RonaldMcD .. who'd have believed that in 1990?!

lchic - 08:56pm Jan 21, 2002 EST (#10949 of 10953)

Martin Luther KING .. didn't that guy have a 'dream' .. wasn't it about humanity, peace, and getting Nukes Down?! I believe it was!

lchic - 09:07pm Jan 21, 2002 EST (#10950 of 10953)

Why bears get sore heads ... small detail - big consequences:

    'the question contained a wrong diagram, holding them up on the paper which is worth one-third of the total marks. The two students say the error may cost them a place at university.

lchic - 12:10am Jan 22, 2002 EST (#10951 of 10953)

Enron is just a blatant obvious ugly symptom of an endemic disease. nilent "The Collapse of Enron-- Moderated" 1/21/02 10:47pm

lchic - 06:22am Jan 22, 2002 EST (#10952 of 10953)

jon_st_just "The Collapse of Enron-- Moderated" 1/22/02 5:13am

lchic - 06:35am Jan 22, 2002 EST (#10953 of 10953)

They're only words ...

    It was supposed to be a celebration of Martin Luther King day: the Florida city of Lauderhill's unveiling of a plaque in honour of James Earl Jones, the black American actor who appeared in The Hunt for Red October and Field of Dreams. Unfortunately, as the Miami Herald reports, a mistake meant it ended up honouring James Earl Ray, Luther King's killer. The inscription compounded the error: 'Thank you James Earl Ray,' it said, 'for keeping the dream alive.' (Miami Herald)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Email to Sysop  Your Preferences

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


Enter your response, then click the POST MY MESSAGE button below.
See the
quick-edit help for more information.








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