New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

Technology has always found its greatest consumer in a nation's war and defense efforts. Since the last attempts at a "Star Wars" defense system, has technology changed considerably enough to make the latest Missile Defense initiatives more successful? Can such an application of science be successful? Is a militarized space inevitable, necessary or impossible?

Read Debates, a new Web-only feature culled from Readers' Opinions, published every Thursday.

rshowalter - 08:22am Jul 12, 2001 EST (#6965 of 11896)
Robert Showalter mrshowalter@thedawn.com

MD6938 rshowalter 7/11/01 7:19pm

From time to time, I set out directories and summaries of this thread, because it is extensive ...
MD6837 rshowalter 7/10/01 10:13am ... MD6838 rshowalter 7/10/01 10:13am .... MD6839 rshowalter 7/10/01 10:14am

These links connect to organized directories of many hundreds of links by almarst and gisterme . . . with summaries of main points.

MD6839 rshowalter 7/10/01 10:14am contains this:

Counting search pages, for characters, gives some sense of the participation. Here are the number of search pages for these posters (as of today )

Putin stand-in, Almarst --- 66 search pages.

Bush Advisor stand-in, gisterme ----- 59 search pages

I do not believe that gisterme can possibly have written what he has, without the knowledge and consent of the top officers of the Bush administration concerned with missile defense - MD6928 rshowalter 7/11/01 2:15pm

Clinton stand-in, beckq, or cookies2 ----- 7 search pages

Dawn Riley - - - - 115 search pages

Robert Showalter - - - - 166 search pages (saturated)

I've contributed the most words to the MD thread, and Dawn the most citations and the most connection to the news.

But the involvement of the "stand-ins" has been very extensive, too, represents an enormous work committment on thier part, and their postings are, I think, very impressive. . . . . . I believe that their work has assisted in the focusing of problems where neither the US nor the Russians were clear about how to make contact with each other before.

This Missile Defense thread is an ongoing attempt to show that internet usages can be a format for negotiation and communication, between staffed organizations, capable of handling more complexity, with more clarity and more complete memory, than could happen otherwise.

I believe that is something relatively new, in need of development, and clearly needed. I feel that progress is being made, and that impasses that were intractable before may be more tractable now.

lunarchick - 08:31am Jul 12, 2001 EST (#6966 of 11896)
lunarchick@www.com

Alex: to Aboriginal people culture is important. !! Tides and time lead to change, but, people don't want their culture and traditions washed away.

lunarchick - 08:38am Jul 12, 2001 EST (#6967 of 11896)
lunarchick@www.com

2008 the bidding is on for the Olympics. Toronto note that out of the past six Olympics, the outright favourite didn't get the games. The Human Rights Issue is beginning to figure - turning the Chinese selection into a political one.

Concerns re how the Chinese State treats it's own people. Commentator said: Months ago ... A man had his business demolished. No compensation. He spoke to international reporters ... he was taken away ... can not be traced.

China ought not to get the Games until the corrupt Government that has no respect for the individual citizen is outted! dR

amacd - 08:44am Jul 12, 2001 EST (#6968 of 11896)
ENRONGATE, who killed cock Robin?

Bush definitely needs more testing in his "boost phase", although I have every confidence that his "terminal phase" will function perfectly ------ and soon.

rshowalter - 08:50am Jul 12, 2001 EST (#6969 of 11896)
Robert Showalter mrshowalter@thedawn.com

Interesting first line in today's Lead Editorial:

A Missile Defense Test for Congress http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/12/opinion/12THU3.html

"The Pentagon has not yet developed any technology that can reliably shoot down enemy missiles. Yet the Bush administration seems determined to sidestep Congressional and European misgivings and the 1972 Antiballistic Missile Treaty and start building a rudimentary missile shield during its first term. Its latest gambit is a plan for a new test site in Alaska, with a few interceptor rockets stored nearby for possible emergency use. Some details remain unclear, but the arrangement could dangerously blur the distinction between testing and the fielding of an operational system.

"Congress should insist that testing programs remain within the limits of the ABM treaty. It should not approve the deployment of an operational system until it is satisfied that the technology has been reliably proven and that every effort has been made to preserve the benefits of existing arms agreements. Senior Pentagon officials will testify today on missile defense issues before the Senate Armed Services Committee. Senators should use this hearing to press for more information on the Alaska plan and should demand assurances that it will not be used to circumvent the ABM treaty.

"That treaty allows almost unlimited testing of ground-based defenses, but confines such testing to two designated sites, currently Kwajalein Island in the Pacific and White Sands, N.M. A new test from Kwajalein is scheduled for Saturday.

"Shifting future tests to Alaska would require Russia's agreement. Moscow understands as well as everyone else that Alaska is where the United States would want to put a functioning missile defense base aimed at thwarting attack from North Korea. By agreeing to a change in test sites, Russia would, in effect, be taking the first important step toward modifying the ABM treaty to accommodate limited national missile defenses. Such agreement would be welcome. But it may not come in time for construction to start this summer on the Alaska test site, as the administration envisions.

"Last month Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld refused to promise that nothing planned for the next budget year would breach the ABM treaty. Congress must insist on such a pledge before it approves any money for the Alaska test site.

(4927 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense