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 - 08:26pm May 7, 2001 EST (#3476 of 3480)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

1621: almarst-2001 3/28/01 3:35pm .....

I commented: 1623: rshowalter 3/28/01 3:42pm .."Don't assume that the American PEOPLE want to fight -- they want to live and let live -- I can understand how that may be hard to believe -- but the barriers to peace may not be very great. " ..... and A responded

"Hopefully so. It seems to me, the Russia has no reasons to be an enemy of US. Unless the US will try to isolate and diminish the Russia in order to preserve its domination of Europe.

"I don't think ANY nation loves to fight. Unfortunatly, the foreign policy desisions are far from transparent, even in US. And there are very significant behind-the-scene forces, including military-industrial complex and enery companies who may not neceserelly reflect the desire of general population. And they have enough power over the cash-starved politicians and the media to influence the population.

Cast of characters -- a "PUTIN STAND-IN" -- almarstel2001 (8)

1630: almarst-2001 3/28/01 4:16pm ...... 1635: almarst-2001 3/28/01 4:34pm
1639: almarst-2001 3/28/01 4:40pm ..... 1642: almarst-2001 3/28/01 4:47pm
1643: almarst-2001 3/28/01 4:50pm ..... 1662: almarst-2001 3/29/01 10:10am made key points:

"It would be wise to point to Dirac that the road will not stop there. And while we are paying outrageous amounts of money to develop a way to kill and destroy more efficiently while keeping our feets warm seeping the beer and enjoying the picture on evening TV, other nations watch this with horor and determination to prevent the "opportunity" to found themselve on the "receiving end" of this show.

"Some may decided to capitulate and come on the knees to US asking for "protection" and right to exist. Others, the "rouge" ones, may decide to resist and prevent this to ever happen to them. And I may be wrong, but believe the last is a sentiment of a majority.

"It is hard to predict the outcome. But looking back into the history of Human Civilization, the following can be learned:

"- The period of time a single nation or even a small groups of nations could enjoy the absolute dominating power was always limited and steadily shortening, probably due to the speed of dissimilation of information.

"- There newer was and never will be an absolute defence for any significant period of time before becoming absolete by new and usually much less expensive offensive device.

"- Very little can be done, if at all, to eliminate the thread completely from someone desperate to cause the damage at any cost, even suicide.

"- Even the small fraction of resources spent on arms and wars could dramatically improve this world and eliminate most of the reasons for wars in a first place. Speaking of Cost Effectiveness.

"- Rasing the children in a society which glorifies the military power as way to ensure fear and obidience from others while living in fear from retaliation but counting on 100% protection and lack of consequences will bring-up the generation of coward killers and moral monsters. The Colombine tragedy will look like an innocent picnic. Speaking of Morality.

1655: almarst-2001 3/29/01 10:30am ...... 1671: almarst-2001 3/29/01 10:52am
1678: almarst-2001 3/29/01 11:28am ..... 1688: almarst-2001 3/29/01 11:55am
1696: almarst-2001 3/29/01 12:20pm ..... 1705:

rshowalter - 08:26pm May 7, 2001 EST (#3477 of 3480)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Cast of characters -- a "PUTIN STAND-IN" -- almarstel2001 (9)

2012: almarst-2001 4/5/01 2:44pm was important with respect to nuclear disarmament -- it was a conditional acceptance (on the "stand in" basis of this thread -- and may be interesting as a "dry run"

. rshowalter 4/5/01 2:32pm "Speaking for the longer term -- the only source of energy on the horizon, that can let the world go on indefinitely, and permit peoples now impoverished to share in prosperity -- has to be nuclear power. "

Agree.

"But nuclear weapons would have to be effectively outlawed. Many kinds of stability and reliability would have to be higher than today. "

Mutually dependent.

THIS, ON OUR "DRY RUN" BASIS, IS IMPORTANT COMMON GROUND.

(3 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense