Forums

toolbar



 [F] 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?


Earliest MessagesPrevious MessagesRecent MessagesOutline (7178 previous messages)

rshowalter - 10:53pm Jul 18, 2001 EST (#7179 of 7185) Delete Message
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

The Bush administration has had such complete party discipline that it has been able to say outrageous things, and completely quash dissent or rational consideration of what it asserts. That may be changing.

G.O.P. Moderates Deal New Setback to House Leaders By ALISON MITCHELL and ELIZABETH BECKER http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/19/politics/19CONG.html

WASHINGTON, July 18 Faced with a threatened rebellion by Republican moderates, House Republican leaders today abruptly delayed voting on President Bush's initiative to funnel more federal money to religious groups to deliver social services.

rshowalter - 10:54pm Jul 18, 2001 EST (#7180 of 7185) Delete Message
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

The Bush administration is taking positions that seem to be putting it in conflict with every major stakeholder except itself.

Pushing Agenda for ABM's, Bush Prepares to Meet Putin By MICHAEL R. GORDON http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/19/international/19MISS.html

"There's a good reason not to get into 15-year negotiations, which is what it has taken to create arms control treaties," Ms. Rice added. "I'm saying it's not necessary."

Comment: This issue of speed is important -- but in the last four months, some things in international relations have moved very fast. Perhaps, under the new conditions, Rice's estimate of the time negotiation takes may be too high by a factor of ten or more.

"Although Washington does not want another arms negotiation, it does want Russia's blessing to proceed with its program. That is not only important for building new ties with Moscow, but it is also important to soothe European anxieties and to maintain Congressional support for multibillion-dollar effort.

"Time is running out. The State Department sent a cable to its diplomats this month advising them that the testing program would "come into conflict with the ABM treaty in months, not years."

"If it does not obtain Russia's approval to abandon the ABM treaty, Washington can withdraw on six months' notice. The administration is hoping that the withdrawal threat will pressure the Russians to come to an accommodation with Washington. Pulling out of the accord, however, is a double-edged sword and would have consequences for the Bush administration that could exceed the uproar in Europe over the White House opposition to the Kyoto environment accord.

"If the ABM treaty is changed," a German official said, "it should be a negotiated solution between the United States and the Russians. Our concern is that there is a framework that has served us well and that we should only do away with the old framework if we have a better one."

rshowalter - 10:54pm Jul 18, 2001 EST (#7181 of 7185) Delete Message
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

We seem to be in interesting times. If technical facts in the open literature can be examined to closure, much may clarify.

For now, there are muddles on matters of life and death where reasonable people have a right, and an obligation, to be careful and expect care from others.

Few Missile Defense Details Emerge After Powell Talks by JANE PERLEZwith MICHAEL WINES http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/19/international/19DIPL.html

"Contradictory" U.S. Words on ABM Issue Puzzle Russia by PATRICK E. TYLER http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/14/international/14RUSS.html

almarst-2001 - 10:56pm Jul 18, 2001 EST (#7182 of 7185)

Triangular Diplomacy http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/18/opinion/18WED1.html

"Moscow and Beijing were unsettled by NATO's 1999 intervention in Kosovo, undertaken to protect ethnic Albanians from persecution by their Serbian rulers."

Correct.

Except "undertaken to protect ethnic Albanians from persecution by their Serbian rulers" part. This is a pure a one-sided propaganda a-la Mr. Gebbels.

rshowalter - 11:06pm Jul 18, 2001 EST (#7183 of 7185) Delete Message
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

almarst , even if I agreed with you, and, for all the problems, I don't, you have to give the Times a break there. The connection of the TIMES with Goebels is disproportionate.

And yes, I know how grossly misleading the reported number of murders was.

More Messages Unread Messages Recent Messages (2 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Cancel Subscriptions  Search  Post Message
 Email to Sysop  Your Preferences

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  / Missile Defense







Home | Site Index | Site Search | Forums | Archives | Shopping

News | Business | International | National | New York Region | NYT Front Page | Obituaries | Politics | Quick News | Sports | Science | Technology/Internet | Weather
Editorial | Op-Ed

Features | Arts | Automobiles | Books | Cartoons | Crossword | Games | Job Market | Living | Magazine | Real Estate | Travel | Week in Review

Help/Feedback | Classifieds | Services | New York Today

Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company