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?

artemis130 - 05:22pm May 9, 2001 EST (#3609 of 3639)
caveat venditor

gisterme - 04:29pm May 9, 2001 EST (#3607 of 3609)

On the other hand it was apparently too hard for the rest of the world to stand by and watch the Serbs slaughter the Kosovar Alabanians or drive them out of their homes. A tough problem.

Funny that it's apparently not been so hard for you to watch the KLA ethnically cleanse Kosovo under NATO's watchful eye.

Far more Albanians had already been killed in the Serb invasion of Kosovo than the number of Serbs killed in subsequent UN bombing.

Not to bust your bubble - but a bit of simple math is due here.

UNMIK confirmed 2,900 dead in Kosovo by exhumation. No indication of nationality, ethnicity or combat status.

NATO admits at least 500 civilian dead during its bombing. Estimates range to 2,000.

Hundreds confirmed dead and additional reports of 2,000 missing and presumed dead in post-NATO Kosovo from the KLA's little ethnic cleansing campaign against Serb and Roma civilians.

You do the math.

(You have different numbers? - please, go out and get them. I'm sure we'd all be interested in the truth.)

artemis130 - 05:30pm May 9, 2001 EST (#3610 of 3639)
caveat venditor

igranof1 - 10:51am May 9, 2001 EST (#3599 of 3607)

Missile Defense has always been a ploy for the weaponization of space as part of the Joint Chiefs of Staff's VISION 20/20 plan (You're telling me that a laser so precise as to shoot a missile on the ground in enemy territory while it is launching is only going to be used defensively!!!???). The real intention is only now coming to the fore with Rumsfield's space militization plan as Missile Defense fails to get the public and international support that this administration has hoped. Finally, at least, the administration is forced to where its Real Politik heart on its sleeve, and admit that their intention is to junk the rule of law (i.e. arms control treaties) and aim for what the VISION 20/20 document calls Full spectrum Dominance (water, land, air, space and information).

Of course - it's a trojan horse. The military will sell it to Congress on a "defense" basis and it'll morph into something entirely different just because it can. Congress will eventually get used to the power trip & we'll eventually totally "militarize" american thinking, throwing diplomacy and all the other little niceties of civilization to the winds. Don't think it can happen? - think again. Human nature, bud. (Just read a few of Hoplite's comments in the Safire forum & you'll catch my drift.)

And as far as those who so "easily" have explained away my question on Canada - obviously the whole question flew over their heads at space-laser orbit.

possumdag - 05:46pm May 9, 2001 EST (#3611 of 3639)
Possumdag@excite.com

A panel of scientific experts - real science/engineers with reputations ought to front before Congress, prior to sanction of expenditures of public taxes.

paulistano - 05:59pm May 9, 2001 EST (#3612 of 3639)

As the world's leading power it is imperative that the nation spend whatever is necessary to prevent being caught unprepared when some unexpected danger arises. The USA will not have the time as it did in 1916 and 1941 to arm itslef when thereatened. Moreover, while a missle defense is costly when compared to preparing for a biological or similar attack, there is no logical reason to refrain from preparing for both. Certainly, nothing has been proposed that would effectively break the bank, so using the excuse that we can't afford to defend oursleves is not a valid excuse.

almarst-2001 - 06:10pm May 9, 2001 EST (#3613 of 3639)

gisterme 5/9/01 4:29pm

"These days, there aren't many places that need "liberation" in the classical sense because there aren't any empires that are unilaterally imposing their will by military force. That's good. "

Do you need a help to count all people's deads due to US crusades after the WWII? The very strong perseption is that US is determined to unilaterally impose its will by military force on one condition - NO US CASUALTIES.

"it was apparently too hard for the rest of the world to stand by and watch the Serbs slaughter the Kosovar Alabanians or drive them out of their homes."

Good you mentioned "apparently";)

Can you list exactly who the "rest of the world" are? By the way, the UN Security council - the only legal body able to authorize the military intervention, DID NOT do so. While I agree with your conclusion, you are apparently not well informed on this issue. The NYT Kosovo forum is still open. As well as the great wealth of info on the internet.

almarst-2001 - 06:22pm May 9, 2001 EST (#3614 of 3639)

paulistano 5/9/01 5:59pm

You could convince some if not for the fact that US after the WWII conducted a very aggressive and criminal affairs, by far more then any other nation I am avare of. Till the end of the Cold War there was an excuse of fighting the other "evil empire". What happend in the last 10 years is purelly a strive to world domination by any means.

Surelly, any nation has a right for self-defense. However, the carrent state of US military budget and posture is extreamly offensive.

Can I ask you what would you think if being a citizen of another country?

(25 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense