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?

dndn1a - 07:35pm May 8, 2001 EST (#3548 of 3595)

T-ball on the front yard why not guns in space

rshowalter - 07:40pm May 8, 2001 EST (#3549 of 3595)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Some things are "just not on."

Trends exist, and beating trend lines by an order of magnitute -- on a number of things -- one after another -- that gets far fetched. rshowalter 5/2/01 6:09pm

rshowalter - 07:54pm May 8, 2001 EST (#3550 of 3595)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

I think the suggestions in almarst-2001 5/8/01 7:20pm are brilliant, correct, and entirely practical.

It shouldn't be asking too much to keep groups of people from killing each other, at least most of the time. At least a good enough job to keep human groups from nuking each other, or threatening to.

rshowalter - 07:58pm May 8, 2001 EST (#3551 of 3595)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

On Sept 25, in 266-269 I made some suggestions about nuclear disarmament. One suggestion was this:

" For effective elimination of nuclear weapons, and to establish conditions so that they stay eliminated, I believe that artists and other people must make it memorably clear how bad nuclear weapons are, so that no one wants to make them again. So that no one condones their use again. If people remember this, anyone trying to make a nuclear weapon is overwhelmingly likely to be caught and punished. It should be the tradition that the property rights and moral rights of anyone making nuclear weapons should be dismissed, and any and all force mobilized to prevent the building of nuclear weapons or their use. rshowalt 9/25/00 7:35am

Given what nukes do, what's unreasonable or impractical about that?

bllfstr - 08:03pm May 8, 2001 EST (#3552 of 3595)

TOO EARLY TO KNOW BUT IT APPEARS THAT WE ARE RE-ENTERING SDI.

ohducks - 08:03pm May 8, 2001 EST (#3553 of 3595)

I thought the United States had signed an agreement that space would not be used for military purposes. What a pandora's box. Does anyone think for one moment that if this type of technology is pursued that China won't also pursue it. That other nations won't use this as an excuse to also excellerate the building and stockpiling of additonal arsenals. Do we want Armegedon? How many nuts are loose in the White House? How many nuts are thinking about the lining the pockets of their contributors with missle defense dollars? Maybe we should have a referendum and see if the people of the United States want their tax dollars spent this way. I just pray that some day we may all beat our swords into plow shares. But little boys like playing with guns more than they like working in farm fields. God help us all.

gisterme - 08:08pm May 8, 2001 EST (#3554 of 3595)

rshowalter wrote: "...But none of these assumptions makes sense, from a distance, from America's point of view, or from the world's point of view...."

You are right Robert! All that stuff you are referring to is complete nonsense. Nobody on this board nor any reasonable person anywhere could draw any of the enabling assumptions you suggested from the first statement. How does it help this conversation to post a load of BS that doesn't match anybody's point of view and then proclaim it to be BS? Then to further claim that if the Bush administration is doing/thinking that kind of nonsense that they are "beautiful"? What's up with that Robert?.

You know, since yesterday I've had a little time to think about this discussion. I've said pretty much what I want to say about the past. What's the point of beating a dead horse? Isn't it the future that we should be concerned with? This debate is not about cold war history or about who did what to whom way back when. This debate is about what the world (not just the US) should do now to reach the objective of zero nukes anywhere.

The problem with arguing about the past is that it tends to push us back toward that no-longer-necessary frame of mind that existed during those times. Nobody should judge today's ex-Soviet rebublics by the unfortunate chain of events set in motion by Stalin. We've already agreed about the nature of that man. He and the throne he built for himself are gone. Likewise let's don't blame the NATO nations for doing what they had to do to dismantle that throne. That's the fundametal point I'd like to make. If peace hasn't been made yet, then why not now?

If the foolishnes of this species in its past must be the pattern for its future then there won't be enough tears. But if this species can learn from its mistakes and move on, there is great hope. I fervently believe the second case is the truth.

Since this IS just a discussion, why not invoke some transcendental power, for the sake of the discussion, and declare a moment of grace? Let's rise above bickering over the past (since nobody now has anybody else's beer) and make a proactive assumption of good intentions by all here in this, the present? I will declare on my part that my sincere desire is to see the world rid of all nuclear weapons. I will also honestly delcare that I have no hidden agenda. What I say WRT this discussion is all there is for me; the fullness of my personal "rice bowl" is completely independent of the outcome of this discussion. Finally, Robert, you may find this fact ironic...at the time gisterme entered this discussion he REALLY WAS NEUTRAL WRT the idea of a BMD. The reason I chose to take the baton was because I felt some of your arguements were disingenuous.

The end of the age of empire via colonization or conquest, enforced by military occupation is over. It started in ancient days and finally gave up the ghost when the Berlin Wall came down. Its wake was the ensuing celebration of a new age. Let's look forward to what we can do in the new age, rather than dwelling on what we wish had been done in the old. Could you do that?

(41 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense