![[F]](../_images/site.gif) 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?
    (2727 previous messages)
rlgardner01
- 12:29pm Apr 29, 2001 EST (#2728
of 2732)
Well, well, well. So what now guys? China announces it's highly
predictable response to the American buildup for Star Wars II. I'll
be very interested to see what y'all come up with.
rshowalter
- 01:51pm Apr 29, 2001 EST (#2729
of 2732) 
Robert Showalter
showalte@macc.wisc.edu
China's behavior seems entirely responsible.
Why do you think it isn't?
Is the United States supposed to be free to threaten all other
countries with impunity? Why exactly?
How does that serve the interests of the United States? Or of
anyone else. Comments like yours should give political leaders
(backed, often, by informed polulations) in China, Russia, and many
other countries good reason to resist the thoughtless bullying of
the United States?
Moreover, Star Wars is a fraud. Technically, it doesn't work, and
has never had a reasonable technical prospect of working. But as a
threat - it does work - as psychological warfare.
If you think China's response is "highly predictable" then
the futility of Star Wars as a source of security for the United
States ought to be clear to you.
rshowalter
- 02:07pm Apr 29, 2001 EST (#2730
of 2732)
Robert Showalter
showalte@macc.wisc.edu
Here are NYT articles on the Chinese response in question:
April 28, 2001 F.B.I. Warns That Chinese May Disrupt U.S. Web
Sites by ELIZABETH BECKER http://www.nytimes.com/2001/04/28/technology/28CHIN.html
"WASHINGTON, April 27 - With tensions between
China and the United States spilling into cyberspace, the F.B.I.
warned on Thursday that Chinese hackers might mount strikes
against American Web sites over the next week.
Odds are, China gave the FBI fair warning -- sensible, and also
giving a chance for Americans to institute defenses. According to
Becker's article, there have been MANY US invasions of Chinese web
sites, and only a few Chinese invasions of American sites ( 302
American attacks on Chinese sites, 5 Chinese attacks on American
sites, according to the article.)
************
Then China apparently acted: April 29, 2001 Chinese Hackers
Invade 2 Official U.S. Web Sites by THE NEW YORK TIMES http://www.nytimes.com/2001/04/29/world/29HACK.html
*********
At the same time China made an entirely reasonable argument in
public -- one that seems responsible and proportionate to me. And
one that should make people think.
April 29, 2001 China Looks to Foil U.S. Missile Defense
System by MICHAEL R. GORDON http://www.nytimes.com/2001/04/29/world/29CHIN.html
"BEIJING - Fearful that an antimissile defense
could embolden the United States to intervene in crises on China's
doorstep, Beijing is focusing on low-cost ways to thwart the plan,
including ways to attack the defense system itself, China's top
arms control official said.
"We have seen that the United States wantonly
bombed Yugoslavia and that Yugoslavia had no means to retaliate,"
the official, Sha Zukang, said in an interview. "Once the
United States believes it has both a strong spear and a strong
shield, it could lead them to conclude that nobody can harm the
United States and they can harm anyone they like anywhere in the
world. There could be many more bombings like what happened in
Kosovo."
China's argument seems entirely reasonable to me. And, as I've
said at lenght in this thread, the number of low cost ways to thwart
any missile defense plan, and deter the US otherwise, is great.
And getting greater.
The idea of an "invulnerable island America" is absurd under
current technical conditions.
For that reason, the US should work for peace and military
balances that are stable.
Now, much too often, it is doing the opposite.
rshowalter
- 02:32pm Apr 29, 2001 EST (#2731
of 2732)
Robert Showalter
showalte@macc.wisc.edu
The arguments that claim a military security benefit for Star
Wars are all extremely unstable -- and not only because the entire
system is a fake, though that is surely a major issue.
Even if missile defense was feasible, and it isn't - missile
defense invites diplomatic instability that defeats the purpose of
missile defense itself.
For example, the destabilization of China's security from even
the threat of missile defense is a serious matter. If Star Wars
worked, China would be subject to nuclear blackmail - stripped of
her current small deterrent. She has to be concerned about that.
If I were China now, I'd be working very hard to make a stable,
complete, comprehensive peace with Russia -- and working to buy a
few hundred Russian ICBM's. If the leaders of those two nations
entered talks for that purpose -- with respresentatives of the EU,
the Koreas, and Japan invited, and with the press invited -- a great
deal might be sorted out between two nations ought to have more
solid relations -- with old hatreds worked out. And the logic of the
world situation would become clear.
  (1
following message)
  
 
New York Times on the Web Forums Science
Missile Defense
| 
