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.

lchic - 07:54pm Feb 10, 2002 EST (#11443 of 11476)

'Happy Mardi .. ' - sounds a contradiction in terms Lou ..

GI: You have it wrong re RS, for he 'was born standing up and talking back' .. Breast fed kryptonite in the arms of Venus .. and kept on going from strength to strength .. found interesting lyrics here, one presumes, He in Conversation with His Homeland:

I’ll keep you by my side with
My superhuman might
Kryptonite
You called me strong, you called me weak,
But still your secrets I will keep
You took for granted all the times I
Never let you down
You stumbled in and bumped your head, if
Not for me then you would be dead
I picked you up and put you back
On solid ground

( Arnold )

But

Why didn't Salt lake go in for a nice homely nuclear display -- i asked myself --- why resort to the old indigenous rather than proclaim the new and modern ...

You Americans are an inigma ... even so the whole world's talking about you - even Patsy! http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?50@@.ee9f0f2/0

talisman90 - 07:55pm Feb 10, 2002 EST (#11444 of 11476)

rshow55 2/10/02 7:23pm

In a world as imperfect as the one we live in, we shouldn't fund projects that require impossible degrees of perfection when there are other alternatives (interdiction, and diplomacy, to name two) that are much more sensible.

Not to mention pre-emptive strikes, and regime changes to name two more. However, if China and the other problem countries develop cruise missiles... That's why I like as many weapons systems that work as possible. The world always was a very dangerous place, too many folks grew up in La-La Land and don't know how many Hitlers are out there waiting for a weakness. To his credit, Bush won't allow a weakness to develop.

rshow55 - 08:02pm Feb 10, 2002 EST (#11445 of 11476)

If Bush wants our nation to be strong, he'd be well advised to not waste resources on projects that cannot possibly work.

Resources in R and D are bets - - and it is important to make good ones -- not insanely risky or impossible "sucker bets."

lchic - 08:07pm Feb 10, 2002 EST (#11446 of 11476)

The GI:st of the argument seems to imply that the USA's foreign-office diplomatic core ought to go to 'finishing school' Switzerland, France .... how long before a EuroMat might say of a US negotiator :

"I've seen all your qualifications
You got from the Sorbonne"

lchic - 08:11pm Feb 10, 2002 EST (#11447 of 11476)

The art and science of diplomacy .. is about NOT beating down on folks in the nuclear sense, rather, it's about finding ways to enable minds and people to get along - WELL - and each maximise their existence peacefully.

talisman90 - 08:17pm Feb 10, 2002 EST (#11448 of 11476)

rshow55 2/10/02 8:02pm

Resources in R and D are bets - - and it is important to make good ones -- not insanely risky or impossible "sucker bets."

I appreciate your concerns. $10-billion for R&D for NMD is a lot. However, if there are ever any incoming ICBMs that might seem like a very wise investment. Don't forget, by the time any NMD system would be ready to deploy there may not be any money to deploy a huge system. If it's a small "R&D" type of system just to improve accuracy, that should be okay. I agree that we don't want to build an expensive "Maginot Line", but to leave a huge vulnerability undefended is a mistake too. Besides, it's the technological advances themselves that keep the wolves from our door.

rshow55 - 08:20pm Feb 10, 2002 EST (#11449 of 11476)

So we agree that we're placing bets. We need to do it wisely. I'm not against taking rational chances. I'm against taking crazy chances.

talisman90 - 08:21pm Feb 10, 2002 EST (#11450 of 11476)

lchic 2/10/02 8:11pm

The art and science of diplomacy .. is about NOT beating down on folks in the nuclear sense, rather, it's about finding ways to enable minds and people to get along - WELL - and each maximise their existence peacefully.

Appeasement? What do you recommend we do with the terrorists in our midst?? It's a little late for the "peaceful co-existence" speech. Maybe the EU would rather appease terrorists, but we prefer to eliminate them.

lchic - 08:23pm Feb 10, 2002 EST (#11451 of 11476)

On defending Singapore:

The Brits knew the attack would come into the harbour from the sea.

The Aussies knew that it was necessary to move north and hold the jungle.

The reality is there may be no such thing as 100%defense ... it's all a perception.

When there's gurrilla warfare amongst the people -- no point trying to ZAP them .. usually there's need for a political change of mindset .. horses for courses!

(25 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense