[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 (7288 previous messages)

rshowalter - 05:46pm Jul 22, 2001 EST (#7289 of 7334) Delete Message
Robert Showalter

With sensible negotions, there's no excuse for burning, or even scorching, either flag or constitution.

lunarchick - 06:44pm Jul 22, 2001 EST (#7290 of 7334)

Missile Watch! .. Superpower? .. U-2 ..Powers

lunarchick - 07:01pm Jul 22, 2001 EST (#7291 of 7334)

Back from your trip Showalter? .. Vlad still has one card not yet on the table!? Bwsh-Putin .. Rice-PopsMoscow Tuesday.

lunarchick - 07:11pm Jul 22, 2001 EST (#7292 of 7334)

USA condones 9,000+ small arms murders in USA ?


Nations sign watered down UN small arms agreement

The first United Nation conference to curb illegal trafficking in small arms has ended with 189 nations agreeing on a watered-down plan in line with Washington's demands.

The agreement dropped calls to limit individual civilian ownership of guns or bar governments from selling weapons to rebel groups, leaving many Africans, Europeans and human rights groups visibly angry.

Closing the meeting, the conference President Camilo Reyes of Colombia criticised US intransigence, saying he wanted to express his disappointment over the conference's inability to agree due to one state.

But he said the plan was a good start.

The plan calls for governments to ensure manufacturers keep records and mark small arms so illegally trafficked weapons can be traced.

rshowalter - 07:15pm Jul 22, 2001 EST (#7293 of 7334) Delete Message
Robert Showalter

The news of talks between President Bush and President Putin seems very good, as far as it goes.

The key requirement that negotiations be interdependent is being adressed. Almarst's been very emphatic about that requirement - which is a reasonable one. If what almarst has said fits the feelings of the Russians, very large reductions in nuclear forced, perhaps including prohibition, might be possible if interdependent issues of military balance were adressed.

Both sides have everything to gain from accomodations that are in the interest of the world population as a whole on these matters -- we're all in this thing together, where the issue of global destruction is concerned.

And both sides, as of now, have problems with the status roles and world leadership roles of their countries that can be best served by making real progress toward peace.

More Messages Unread Messages Recent Messages (41 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