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?

rshowalter - 03:17pm Jun 23, 2001 EST (#5893 of 5899)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

The military budget the Bush administration is proposing is $1500 for every man, woman, and child in the United States -- about $55 for every person on earth.

That's enough, wisely spent, to do stunning good for the world.

And comparable amounts have been spent, year after year, for decades, and are expected indefinitely. Is the world safer and better for it -- or more dangerous and uglier? The question, especially for expenditures since 1991, needs to be asked. almarst , the "Putin stand-in" on this thread, has asked this question forcefully and with eloquence. From speeches and actions, it seems likely that Putin and the Russian government feel as almarst does.

So far as I can tell, nobody has anything close to a coherent reason why US military expenditure is nearly as large as it is.

It dwarfs the military expenditures of all other nation states put together.

But the moneys involved are so large, that there is a large, widely distributed incentive to justify the expenditure -- and to keep questions from being asked. And the mechanisms in place, formal and informal, that keep questions from being asked are powerful, and effective.

Nor is there any sufficient set of safeguards in place, to see that the money is honestly spent.

I believe that everybody concerned about matters of defense, and especially nuclear deployments, should consider carefully the concerns about the “military-industrial complex” set out in the FAREWELL ADDRESS of President Dwight D. Eisenhower …… January 17, 1961. http://www.geocities.com/~newgeneration/ikefw.htm

With circumstances that appear to show a disproportion and operational mismatch between means and ends, the speech seems to me to raise issues of crucial importance today.

rshowalter - 04:01pm Jun 23, 2001 EST (#5894 of 5899)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Apart from the very serious concerns about waste, there are concerns with how this military force is used -and what it does to people. To find case after case of expression about this concern, search "almarst" in this thread, and look at the concerns he raises. An organization and summary of some of his postings follows.

rshowalter - 04:03pm Jun 23, 2001 EST (#5895 of 5899)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

MD5134-5140 rshowalter 6/14/01 5:37pm . . . read as follows: I'm repeating them here, with links, especially to emphasize the concerns of almarst , our "Putin stand-in" in the negotiation simulation, between staffed organizations, that is this thread.

"Much progress by May 8th, by a distinguished and hardworking cast of "stand ins" simulating "Putin" and "Clinton" and "a senior Bush administation advisor" -- with efforts that have continued.

"Here are directories of very extensive postings.

MD3532 rshowalter 5/8/01 6:51pm . . . MD3533 rshowalter 5/8/01 6:53pm

"There was key progress, between me and gisterme by MD3772-3773 rshowalter 5/12/01 6:45pm

. . .

"Here is the multipart Cast of characters -- a " PUTIN STAND-IN" -- almarstel2001 (1-10) MD4389 rshowalter 5/31/01 2:51pm

"With a KEY concession for nuclear and total military accomodation. Even full disarmament might be possible (on this "dry run" basis) but things are mutually dependent .

rshowalter - 04:05pm Jun 23, 2001 EST (#5896 of 5899)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

(continued)

"as of 14 June, there had been 178 more postings by gisterme , since MD3532, with much progress made MD4584 rshowalter 6/7/01 7:59pm ....

MD4640 rshowalter 6/8/01 10:28pm ... MD4641 rshowalter 6/9/01 6:55am

. . . . .

These posts are directories of posts by gisterme.

MD4642 rshowalter 6/9/01 6:57am reads: Here are linked directories of the 170+ postings , in the 8 days between June 6, and June 14, by gisterme.

(continued)

(3 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense