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 - 02:02pm Jun 15, 2001 EST (#5202 of 5245)

On the eve of his first meeting with Vladimir Putin, President Bush said Friday he wants to make Russia a ``partner and an ally'' but also to press his Russian counterpart on weapons proliferation.

Think back to the discussion about posturing...

Bush will also propose to Putin, when the pair meets in Slovenia on Saturday, that they scale down the level of contacts between their two countries in order to lower the profile of arms-control negotiations.

To me that's very puzzling if it's true. What they mean by "scale down the level of contacts" must mean "diplomatic scale". The statement in the article could hardly be more ambiguous.

Maybe the Bush administration thinks there's too much public clamor (from all directions) to accomplish anything without one side or the other getting embarrassed. Delicate negotiations tend to evolve, I think, and all parties want to begin negotiation from the strogest possible position. Once all that "initial position posturing" is over the real process of negotiation, compromise and position adjustment begins. Perhaps that is best done in a quiet thoughtful environment.

gisterme - 02:10pm Jun 15, 2001 EST (#5203 of 5245)

rshowalter wrote ( rshowalter 6/15/01 9:14am ): "...But in terms of word count , hard thought, and the amount of human contact and checking to be expended, efforts need to be increased .... and increased very much..."

What a strange thing to say. How do you reconcile that statement with your position about complexity? Do you choose volume over quality? Those are honest questions.

gisterme - 02:13pm Jun 15, 2001 EST (#5204 of 5245)

rshowalter wrote: "...Some other times, a particular system is beautiful in some ways, and ugly as hell in some other ways..."

That's true, Robert, in the eyes of SOME beholders. But any two might argue about which parts are beautiful to them and which are ugly.

rshowalter - 02:30pm Jun 15, 2001 EST (#5205 of 5245)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Perhaps I can postpone the nuclear instablility posting just a bit to answer you . . I'll try to be clear about both questions, and have you answers within the hour. May not make it, but I'll try.

gisterme - 02:31pm Jun 15, 2001 EST (#5206 of 5245)

rshowalter wrote: "...I think anyone who sees or reads Rehearsing doomsday is likely to share my concern about system safety, in the new internet world..."

That situation won't change so long as we're locked into the MAD paradigm. Let's hope that "first steps" are being taken on this very day to put an end to that.

gisterme - 03:03pm Jun 15, 2001 EST (#5207 of 5245)

rshowalter wrote: "...People who know the power of Senators should be impressed about how difficult it is in the United States to check anything about nuclear weapons. That, to me, is grave cause of concern, for a number of reasons, some psychological, some technical..."

Is it any different anywhere else, Robert? Revealing detailed warfighting plans to the public can only dilute or negate the effectiveness of the plans. Briefing a bunch of legislators about that is just about the same as briefing CNN. A legacy of "leaks" is the unfortunate track record of the US legislature...to the extent that the last several administrations have apparently felt that they can only brief legislators on details about what they want the public to know. A culture of leaks? That is sad if it's true.

WRT Mr. Kerry...I wonder why, after all these years, he suddenly found his conscience just a week or so before a tell-all book was published on the topic? Hmmm.

There's something revealed there about the nature of our species. Folks who are otherwise honest, intelligent, educated and well-meaning do a similar thing all the time. "Let sleeping dogs lie"...that's always easier than facing an embarassing truth eventhough one might expect that the truth will be revealed eventually anyway. It's a kind of defensive procrastination I suppose.

rshowalter - 03:20pm Jun 15, 2001 EST (#5208 of 5245)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

I'm running late.

On the question of targeting -- when the issue is seeing 2000 targets -- the main "secret" revealed (to a bunch of visual animals -- as all human beings are) is this is real.

Sometimes, when only words are involved, people aren't engaged enough to act.

(37 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense