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 - 10:34am Jul 9, 2001 EST (#6789 of 6791)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

We may have some hope for closure and getting to the truth. There are some definite statements on the table.

MD6773 rshowalter 7/8/01 6:55pm . . . MD6774 rshowalter 7/8/01 6:57pm

gisterme:

" Exactly! You've made my point, Robert! Thanks. There's great technology involved; but no miracles required.

Robert Showalter:

There are miracles required. And in terms of what has been achieved ( not drawn by an imaginative commercial artist -- actually achieved ) nothing that indicates that the resolutions required are actually possible seems to exist.

" Perhaps gisterme can correct me here. His references have been useful in the past, and much appreciated.

" ....because reflective coatings invalidate the whole lasar weapon concept for NMD, the points below are mute in a sense -- but not insignificant -- since different logical patterns matter, and since the gross nature of the lasar weapons program frauds need to be set out - - because it is important to understand what has happened, and how corrupt the program is.

" gisterme - if you have any reason to think that the controls and optics for the "orbiting lasar weapon" proposals could do their job - either logically or based on tests -- could you share that with us ?

" Numbers matter here. It isn't enough that things can be built that "sort of look like what's needed."

" Is there any reason at all to think that the resolution on controls is there - or in prospect?

rshowalter - 10:35am Jul 9, 2001 EST (#6790 of 6791)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Could it be that Rice, Rumsfeld, Armitage, Wolfkowitz, and Hadley don't know that the whole program, as a weapons system, is bogus?

Could they have been that deferential to the contractors? That naive? Is that possible?

MD6772 rshowalter 7/8/01 5:21pm

"I think anyone in either the House or the Senate who has trusted the administration on missile defense has been ill served.

rshowalter - 10:35am Jul 9, 2001 EST (#6791 of 6791)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Gisterme , is there any substance to the lasar based weapons programs? On the Garwin close-in smart-rock proposal, you'll note that I admit a technical argument, and admit my own mistakes, when I see them. (search Garwin) And I'll do so here, if you can show me I'm wrong.

We've talked, from time to time about checking in public, on the internet, with real people involved. With real faces and names. People with real careeers at risk (not a confab of retirees.)

Within some limits, that seems to be permissable. We can talk, in terms of open literature, about what "miracles" would be required of DOD -- and the probability of them, in terms of evidence in the open literature. That would be very much in the national interest. Perhaps we should start preparing for that soon.

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense