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?

almarst-2001 - 11:19am Jun 20, 2001 EST (#5528 of 5537)

The crucial to ask in respect to the internal policies of other countries is: Do those policies designed for aor against the majority of population. And for what reason.

The US pretends that such a question is irrelevant and the most importand issue is "individual rights". Which, if fulfilled, will automatically be translated into the most gains to the majority. This statement is hypocritical in most cases and can't stand the serious scruteny. Individual rights are very importand but hardly the most importand aspect of any organised society. The limits and degrees vary depending on many historical and socioeconomical and even ethnical factors of any nation.

Secondly, the US insits on a "fear competition" among the nations and even within its own society. That is possible only among equal. One would not put into the boxing ring Tison aganst 5 year old child. Surelly, Tison would gladly agree to fight "fearly".

rshowalter - 11:20am Jun 20, 2001 EST (#5529 of 5537)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

almarst , I agree.

in MD2997 gisterme 5/2/01 1:09pm . . gisterme asked :

" Okay, Robert, I'll bite. What are the lies, the missteps and who is the very small extraconstitutional group?"

I responded
MD2999 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?7@184.Z4dGaXPHpg8^1772425@.f0ce57b/3224 .... MD3001 rshowalter 5/2/01 1:45pm

there were interesting postings following, including

MD3004 rshowalter 5/2/01 2:14pm . . . MD3014gisterme 5/2/01 3:20pm

rshowalter - 11:23am Jun 20, 2001 EST (#5530 of 5537)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

MD3014, by gisterme, ends with this, which bears consideration from several viewpoints.

" Why should one acknowledge what the whole world already knows? The cold war was a war. "Cold" because the actual battle was mostly economic rather than military. What do you think of when you someone says the cold war is over? Not a military victory. So what is there to acknowledge? There was a strategy and it worked. Still though, that's been some time ago. What about now? Getting rid of some arrows and adding a sheild seems like a reasonable step.

rshowalter - 11:25am Jun 20, 2001 EST (#5531 of 5537)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

The question:

What about now?

includes a key question -- how can Russia, and other nations, be assured, - - really assured that the US will not continue to act as it so often did during the Cold War, and as recently as two years ago, when intelligence data was falsified as part of the justification for war?

rshowalter - 11:27am Jun 20, 2001 EST (#5532 of 5537)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

almarst has come up with one outrage after another-- and some seem likely to be right (and can be checked) and gisterme's response has been, with a little fuzz and moderation in spots, basically this

--

"In a war, we can do anything at all, to anyone."

and, operationally, gisterme seems to say

" and we get to decide when it is war."

Missile defense, stripped of context, is not the main barrier to peace. This concern, by Russia and many other countries, is the key problem.

rshowalter - 11:34am Jun 20, 2001 EST (#5533 of 5537)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

I think some may think I'm misjudging gisterme , and they can judge for themselves.

Search "gisterme" , using the search button below. Page down the search pages (hitting "search" at the bottom of each page -- till gisterm starts, on May 2.)

Read what she says. Notice carnage that she feels isn't worth much consideration.

You will find that, whenever issues of "morality" arise, she discounts these issues almost to the vanishing point.

If the US does the murdering, even if the numbers are huge, it seems to me that gisterme is likely to think that all right.

Other readers may agree or disagree, once they look.

I have similar concerns about Henry Kissinger, and his proteges, as Thomas Friedman, judging from some things he's said, may as well.

And though these may all be distinguished and charming people in many other ways, this still bothers me.

(4 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense