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.

seantga - 02:41pm Jan 30, 2002 EST (#11132 of 11145)

Hello.

I am Sean, the Science and Health forums host. Most recently I was the Science and Health Producer at The New York Times on the Web. You can reach me at sciweb@nytimes.com

I think this is a good time to remind folks of the the discussion this forum supports.

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?

Let's try to stay on topic and keep multiple postings by the same inidividual to a minimum.

Thanks.

mazza9 - 04:48pm Jan 30, 2002 EST (#11133 of 11145)
Louis Mazza

1. Since the last attempts at a "Star Wars" defense system, has technology changed considerably enough to make the latest Missile Defense initiatives more successful? Answer Yes.

2. Can such an application of science be successful? Answer Yes!

3. Is a militarized space

a. inevitable Answer Yes!

b. necessary Answer Yes!

c. or impossible Answer already is!

LouMazza

gisterme - 06:29pm Jan 30, 2002 EST (#11134 of 11145)

"...The stakes, for the nation, are high enough that it matters what is right..."

Are you implying that there are times when it doesn't matter "what is right", Robert? If so, pray tell, when would those times be?

My own philosophy is that "what is right" always matters and that "what is right" and the truth are inseperably entwined. That's why I get so upset when you diverge from and revise facts attempting to manufacture your own "pseudo-truth". The result is a fabrication lacking in both facts and truth. It's such fabrication that can't be right, Robert.

lchic - 08:00pm Jan 30, 2002 EST (#11135 of 11145)

mAzzA - you excell at multi-choice - so simplistic an approach to life :)

rshow55 - 08:14pm Jan 30, 2002 EST (#11136 of 11145)

I was interested in your recent postings, gisterme , and thought them useful in context, but in deference to seantga 1/30/02 2:41pm I'll respond less than I might have.

MD11112 gisterme 1/29/02 5:58pm ... MD11113 gisterme 1/29/02 6:09pm
MD11114 gisterme 1/29/02 6:20pm ...

MD11117 gisterme 1/30/02 3:09am ... MD11118 gisterme 1/30/02 3:18am
MD11119 gisterme 1/30/02 3:21am ... MD11120 gisterme 1/30/02 3:25am
MD11121 gisterme 1/30/02 3:29am ... MD11122 gisterme 1/30/02 3:39am

MD111134 gisterme 1/30/02 6:29pm

. . . . . . .

A few questions:

Re: MD11112 gisterme 1/29/02 5:58pm

"I have never argued that the optical physics involved in the references you gave are not valid. I have argued that those theoretical principals are not so easily applied as you seem to think, especially using the kinds of materials you've proposed. . . . . . .

Does that include gold leaf (a 5000 year old technology) or gold on plastic, used for 40 years? The reflectivity of gold is about 98% -

All Ive really said is that a laser that can defeat any reflective coating is easier to imagine than a reflective coating that can defeat any laser.

Would you repeat that? I cant believe you said it, and believe it. Do you know, for instance, how reflective the mirrors that focus the lasar beam on ABL have to be?

And, more generally, in many of the postings, you say, in essence I, gesterme, am right. I say so.

That I am the great OZ approach fits into what Dowd describes in A Blue Burka for Justice By MAUREEN DOWD

" The theme of Bush I is now the theme of Bush II: Trust us, even if we won't let you verify. We know we're right. We answer to no one."

MD11045 rshow55 1/25/02 2:34pm ... MD11046 rshow55 1/25/02 2:50pm
MD11047 rshow55 1/25/02 2:54pm ...

Would you be for that sort of thing now? For a long time, you were against it.

gisterme - 08:56pm Jan 30, 2002 EST (#11137 of 11145)

Here's a piece about the ABL.

http://www.af.mil/news/airman/0600/abl.htm

gisterme - 09:05pm Jan 30, 2002 EST (#11138 of 11145)

Here's a tuneable laser...

http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/fel_001023.html

(7 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense