[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 (7486 previous messages)

lunarchick - 09:00am Jul 27, 2001 EST (#7487 of 7502)

The post re academic freedom is interesting. New Zealand have guaranteed academic freedom to their Uni Staff. I note that rather than stand to fair debate there's a retrospective GONG by the Pent..

    Raises the question of how long it will be before they retrospectively determine that Websters' Dictionary, and every combination of words there in are 'classifed'.
Orewell's 1984 and Animal Farm sound like titles of night time reading by the 'big brass'. Open the links in first sentence here lunarchick 7/24/01 8:15pm - seems the Admin&Pent have their way and do what they will, going unchecked by the country with the highest number of hollywood private investigators in the world?! When do so many coincidences add up to a point where their amass begins to make a case. A question coming to mind, is, did Bush the Elders Kids of limited talent get pushed into politics via the sights of the old nazi-vigilante's gun? How good was the Washington Post - really? Simple politicans were one thing ... but the power behind the throne, the dark shadow .. much explaining has yet to be done.

    lunarchick - 09:20am Jul 27, 2001 EST (#7488 of 7502)

    Wynne (search) noted that within Nations there's a groundswell, a 'gut feeling', with regards to cutting through propaganda, and it is 'popular opinion'. Raises the question, at what point will the American public determine that the dollars put to defence might be better spent? Reading through the Politics thread regarding MD expenditure, it seems that past allocations must have been wasted, in that basic standard regular equipment in some areas is badly in need of an upgrade. So, who use to determine where those billions of dollars were allocated ?

    lunarchick - 09:22am Jul 27, 2001 EST (#7489 of 7502)

    Karaoke Colin makes C.P.Snow proud!

    lunarchick - 09:38am Jul 27, 2001 EST (#7490 of 7502)

    C18 Russian Village Self-sufficiency ... beats the tax man.

    rshowalter - 10:17am Jul 27, 2001 EST (#7491 of 7502) Delete Message
    Robert Showalter

    lunarchick 7/27/01 9:20am

    " at what point will the American public determine that the dollars put to defence might be better spent?"

    Perhaps at the point where ordinary Americans are prepared to consider that large scale lying might be going on - and therefore be willing to look , rather than look away.

    It has to become more legitimate to question the legitimacy of the military industrial complex - both contractors and the military.

    People have to come understand how decision making in military matters carries such large, and relatively safe, opportunities for cover up and corruption. Few understand this now, and the understanding is essential to an understanding of what has happened.

    If you know how military operations, guarded by classification, work, and how contractors are chosen and pressured, it is perfectly reasonable that very large amounts of money have been diverted, for a long time, into paths that are not in the national interest - and into paths that could subvert american institutions, including both press institutions and political parties.

    Some aspects of the Osprey affair illustrate why. MD978-986 rshowalter 3/14/01 5:22am

    The potential for impropriety is clear, but not widely understood. Patterns such as that shown in Elder Bush in Big G.O.P. Cast Toiling for Top Equity Firm by LESLIE WAYNE March 5, 2001 are ugly , and barely concealed, because they've been "standard operating procedure" long enough that people have stopped concealing some things that would have been considered terrible not so long ago.

    The culture of some of the "military industrial complex" - including the intelligence community - has felt invulnerable for a long time -- immune from the ordinary decencies involved in considering others for a long time, or essays like FLYING INTO TURBULENCE by Peter Martin couldn't be written, and featured in the "respectable" places where they are.

    It may be that, as people in other countries become more aware of these patterns, and less tolerant of them, the climate of American opinion will start to shift in response.

    rshowalter - 10:19am Jul 27, 2001 EST (#7492 of 7502) Delete Message
    Robert Showalter

    Now, nation states, in serious negotiation with the United States, are going to have to judge the credibility of our "missile defense" program carefully, in detail -- with all our important allies watching.

    Some things, long evaded, will be harder and harder to evade as this goes on.

    More Messages Unread Messages Recent Messages (10 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