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.

almarst-2001 - 10:38pm Feb 21, 2002 EST (#11714 of 11726)

Robert,

I don't communicate with any kind of authority and by no means other then Internet forums and E-Mails I send from time to time to columnists, editors or Government representatives.

On relevance of our discussions at this forum, my view is that MD touches many aspects, the technical feasibility being just one of them.

The main questions, in my view, are the following:

1. Is the World domination, the unspoken US policy? And, If yes, even as benevolent as one can imagine, is it desirable? Is it feasible?

2. If not for the World domination, what for the US needs its unprecedented and still expanding military power, almost all offensive by its composition and posture? Can it be explained by the needs for the legitimate defence?

3. If the military force in the order of magnitudes greater then that of any other nation and greater the a dosen next greatest military powers combined - the unprecedented probably since Roman Empire situation - is not sufficient to defend this country, is it a hoax or a honest attempt to provide 100% involnurability?

4. Is it realistic to expect, no matter the cost, to achieve 100% involnurability?

5. How much does it cost any additional percent of involnurability?

In my view, the answer to the first question is most likely YES. At least for some people in power, even if a Missile Defense is bluf, the $ windfall would more then compensate for the embarasment. Particularely giving the very long time-line of this project. In any event, while filling their pockets, they take a highland of a true Patriots. And, if it works, they have a chance to advance the US position toward a New Rome.

How many people of power do you know who would not jump on such opportunity, no matter the real cost to the country and its ordinary taxpayers?

lchic - 06:47am Feb 22, 2002 EST (#11715 of 11726)

There are people, and then there are people .. some are bought and sold, others have ethics and principles, see futher and are brighter.

lchic - 07:04am Feb 22, 2002 EST (#11716 of 11726)

almarst-2001 2/21/02 10:38pm

Questions from Alex beg the question - how does the average AmericanJoe influence USA foreign policy - ?

rshow55 - 07:49am Feb 22, 2002 EST (#11717 of 11726)

Truth is stranger than fiction.

Truth is also considerably more hopeful than deception, ignorance, and lies. Also, when people are paying attention, more stable. Even when things are complicated.

I'll try to answer carefully.

Almarst , one of your comments I'll address right away:

" How many people of power do you know who would not jump on such opportunity, no matter the real cost to the country and its ordinary taxpayers?"

In my opinion, few or none would do so. No groups of people with power would do so. Not in America. Not if they had to do so in public - or had much real risk of having their actions made public. Not unless they had gotten themselves into such a mess that they felt they "had to" hang onto power by all possible means. In which case, they'd be very vulnerable to questions, competently asked, by other influential people.

Any way I look at it, we're in a situation where truth, and careful argument, can have considerable power to improve situations.

I'll be working hard on your questions.

rshow55 - 07:54am Feb 22, 2002 EST (#11718 of 11726)

lchic 2/22/02 7:04am The average americanJoe influences foreign policy when he pays attention, and votes.

" If a nation expects to be both ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be."

— President Thomas Jefferson. 1743-1826

MD11688 rshow55 2/21/02 8:44am

(8 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense