New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

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?

rshowalter - 10:17pm May 1, 2001 EST (#2940 of 2957)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Correction -- they know that hatred of Americans exists -- but somehow, they feel that only

" demons in human form"

could possibly hate the United States.

They need to look at the reasons for the hatred more clearly.

And then go about the practical business of reducing hatred that is now in nobody's interest.

Making peace is, in essential part, a matter of making emotional peace. Bush, who I disagree with on an number of things, acted to communicate that to the public.

muglizh - 10:49pm May 1, 2001 EST (#2941 of 2957)

MISSILE DEFENSE: A megalomaniac misconception, which entails a real threat for national and international security, and aims at both diverting the maximum amount of public funds to the defense industries, and at increasing as much as possible the level of militarization and weaponization of the conditions of world order. COMMON SENSE, PLEASE.

rshowalter - 11:14pm May 1, 2001 EST (#2942 of 2957)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

muglizh 5/1/01 10:49pm

if the missile defense argument is actually subject to clear questions, you should be wrong.

If checking can occur, so that common sense can have some free play.

As of now, "star wars" is nothing but a dream -- and a dream about which a lot of people have had dry heaves for their whole professional lives.

If that were clear to the population, common sense would have a chance.

rshowalter - 11:14pm May 1, 2001 EST (#2943 of 2957)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Military Analysis: Grand Plan, Few Details by MICHAEL R. GORDON http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/02/world/02MILI.html

WASHINGTON, May 1 — President Bush sketched out his vision of a brave new world today in which the United States is protected by a multifaceted antimissile shield, nuclear arsenals are slashed and Washington and Moscow work together.

What he did not explain was how to get there.

Leaders, trying to get their team together, can't commit to details, and shouldn't. But they should also be able to say:

" This looked like a good idea. But it didn't work out."

That's one of the major options that vagueness is supposed to keep open.

rshowalter - 11:19pm May 1, 2001 EST (#2944 of 2957)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

It seems to me that, within the human and political limits, the administration is trying to concede every point made on this thread -- yet go on.

If their objective really is maximized security, on a cost-effective basis, for the United States, that's fine.

Negotiating chips have their uses.

But under the circumstances, CHECKING is essential, and the issues involved are too important for very much "willing suspension of disbelief."

So far so good?

Well, maybe.

davidding - 11:50pm May 1, 2001 EST (#2945 of 2957)

The missile defense has everything to do with "security", that is, job security for the military industry.

Unfortunately, it won't bring security in any other category, and it will squander a huge amount of public money.

artemis130 - 11:52pm May 1, 2001 EST (#2946 of 2957)
caveat venditor

How many of you NMD fans actually don't think that a functioning missile defense is just a hop, skip and a jump away from the Penta-boys turning it into a first-strike system?

After all, isn't that why it was restricted under the ABM treaty to begin with?

Now I'm just waiting for someone to come back to me with "Yeah, but NATO's just a defensive organization" and other such fairy tails.

artemis130 - 11:54pm May 1, 2001 EST (#2947 of 2957)
caveat venditor

Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz are selling you "defense first" characters a trojan horse and a boondoggle.

Don't trust 'em.

atwnw - 11:55pm May 1, 2001 EST (#2948 of 2957)

I regret to vote for George W. Bush in the election. I am very sorry for everybody. I should even give a formal apology to myself and the United States.

artemis130 - 12:06am May 2, 2001 EST (#2949 of 2957)
caveat venditor

The remilitarization of America.

All we'll need after that is one whacko "rogue" president.

(8 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense