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?

gisterme - 07:45pm May 31, 2001 EST (#4410 of 4466)

almarst wrote: "...We have already traveled by this road once..."

I don't see any similarity at all between the nazis gobbling up Europe and the posturing of current administration. I guess we'll just have to wait and see, almarst. I'll repeat the previous prediction that we'll be hearing very little about China as a military threat to anybody a couple of years from now. Robert can be the checker. :-)

gisterme - 07:50pm May 31, 2001 EST (#4411 of 4466)

"Let him who is without sin cast the first stone..." - Jesus Christ

And I see you missed the whole point, almarst.

gisterme - 08:03pm May 31, 2001 EST (#4412 of 4466)

almarst wrote: "...It works to substitutes the brain with a calculator and a heart with a walet.

I am sure, therefore, this oppinion of mine will not insult you;)"

I can't say I understand why you feel that way, almarst. I've said nothing here from the wallet and everything from the heart. I'm not insulted, just sorry to hear that you feel that way.

gisterme - 08:07pm May 31, 2001 EST (#4413 of 4466)

possumdag wrote: "...So if the heart has a mind of it's own ... that's additional?..."

Yeah, possumdag. Probably replaced by a Palm Pilot.

gisterme - 08:33pm May 31, 2001 EST (#4414 of 4466)

possumdag wrote: "...Is it worth the energy? What do we learn from history ... especially when it's bad-history ?

We can learn a lot, especially if we are honest about the world context at the time and don't apply the current context to the past history to make recriminations in the present. That's what I meant earlier when I said "we need to decouple past actions from present motiviations".

In my view, the biggest thing we can learn about the last century is that there has been a huge change in the world context since the end of the cold war. The multi-thousand year era of empire is over.

Is it better to look to today's problems and devote the limited energy available to trying to sort things out?

Yes, possumdag. Upon entering a new era, it seems reasonable that new era methods of solving international problems need to be worked out. A new paradigm is needed. It has been said that "Generals are always planning to win the last war instead of anticipating the next. That's why they so often are unprepared when war comes." Likewise, I think, with the world transition of the last century. The same 'ol cranks and levers we were working in the old era just aren't connected to anything in the new.

Most often there are civillian populations who have needs, want peace, need to visualise a better future."

Exactly right...plus, they need to be able to do more than visualize. That's going to take some time; but if we can all learn to work together it will be done. One step at a time.

possumdag - 02:50am Jun 1, 2001 EST (#4415 of 4466)
Possumdag@excite.com

showalter I take note:

""That's as far as I can go in reporting the best American opinion from the best reporter on the subject, Mr Thomas Friedman. !

cclaude0 - 06:14am Jun 1, 2001 EST (#4416 of 4466)

Fine, fine, fine. Analyze this thing to death; but it comes down to two essential points. First, "strategic balance" is a moot term--strategic balance against whom? The Russians? They are more concerned with selling us heroine than vaporizing our cities. Second, "strategic balance" implies the good-`ol-days of M.A.D. How does M.A.D. come into play with an accidental launch or terrorists who would gladly be "destroyed"? This nation has the ability to defend itself against a very real and new type of threat. Are we going to be still debating this as we possibly survey the smoldering ashes of Los Angeles, for instance? I hope not. What a world...someone ought to sell tickets.

buzz2001a - 07:49am Jun 1, 2001 EST (#4417 of 4466)

L.A. or New York City will be in ashes one day and the politico slimeballs that don't give one whit about America will be held accountable. If these mental giants were at the controls throughout the last century, we would still be on horses, without electricity,etc. There is no vision of the future and no guts to try anything new..... They are pathetically apathetic....

robert114fikse - 07:52am Jun 1, 2001 EST (#4418 of 4466)

I can understand that many Americans want an extra protection against terrorist and countries such as Northern Korea. But I am afraid that the effectiveness of the missile defend system won't be adequate. The majority of terrorist attacks will come by chemical warfare ( Japanese subways ) and by destroying buildings with bombs. A missile defend system will be useless against such attacks.

rshowalt - 08:05am Jun 1, 2001 EST (#4419 of 4466)

Missile Defenses Need More Tests, Key Senator Says by THOM SHANKER http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/01/politics/01MILI.html

WASHINGTON, May 31 — The next chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee said today that it was highly unlikely that missile defenses would be fielded in President Bush's current term, and should not be deployed at all until repeated tests proved their effectiveness.

............................

" And I think our European allies have responded with caution and concern to such a degree that the president is going to have to look again at the complexities of the issue."

We have better means than ever before to sort out the complexities of this issue, and many others - human memory, and human ability to deal with complexity, are being extended by the internet, and the social usages it permits. High time, too. The world is in more danger than it needs to be, and is poorer, too.

(47 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense