New York Times on the Web Forums Science
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?
(7981 previous messages)
- 10:47pm Aug 21, 2001 EST (#7982
Given the stakes, some key points are WORTH CHECKING. That
checking should be morally forcing.
The administration is taking technical positions, many on this
thread, that cannot stand the light of day.
- 06:04am Aug 22, 2001 EST (#7983
From MD7667 lunarchick
With respect to MD the questions include:
Does the technology work?
Are the people developing it aware of only the
micro-aspect their team work on, rather than having a full concept
of the system?
Could money be used to better effect?
Could engineers be employed in worthwhile ways?
A list of NEEDS for the world would relate first
to basic survival, and then employment.
The 'coldness' regarding the USA's policy of 'bombing from a
distance' ... relies on the people of the world not seeing each
other as brothers and sisters .. which they now do - thanks to
improved communications and the efforts of writers and film makers.
WRT the 'Shield' .. it seems that the main players can't
understand it ... making the 'publics' of the world rightfully
- 06:06am Aug 22, 2001 EST (#7984
"Rightfully skeptical" is putting it mildly.
7/10/01 10:14am reads in part:
Bush Advisor stand-in, gisterme is represented by ----- 59
and goes on with language along these lines:
The involvement of gisterme represents an enormous work
committment on gisterme's part. Many of gisterme's
postings are, I think, very impressive. I believe that gisterme's
work has assisted in the focusing of problems where neither the US
nor the Russians were clear about before the give-and-take of this
thread began. So I appreciate gisterme's involvement.
gisterme and I also agree on a number of points about
missile defense, and the related issues of military balances. i And
it is the combined effects of interdependent military issues,
considered as a whole, that most concern our "Putin stand-in,"
almarst . We agree that the Cold War should be over in all
significant ways -- and that Russia and America should come to
relationships that are more cooperative, and less threatening. I
think we'd say, with different emphasis on matters of detail
gisterme and I also both agree that the administration's
missile defense initiative would be worthwhile, even if missile
defense programs never deployed, or never even worked, if they
decentered terrible nuclear standoffs frozen too long, and moved the
world toward much lower levels of nuclear risk, and much higher
levels of world order and peace, in the interests of all concerned.
The program may indeed be serving that purpose, and serving it
more effectively than anybody involved could have reasonably
But it is doing so by uniting the rest of the world in distrust
for the United States, in fear of the United States, and is
dissipating, to a degree that no one would have guessed a few months
ago, the prestige of the US government, and the US military, world
It seems a very high price to pay - - a near-total, unilateral
surrender and disarmament of one of the strongest assets the United
States has had in the world. I'm speaking of our credibility.
Because the missile defense program is militarily insane, for
technical and diplomatic reasons that are easy to check.
Many on this thread.
. . .
Now, we have the spectacle of a "great power" begging its
allies, and its adversaries, to be permitted to commit a massive,
expensive technical folly, corrupting in very many ways so that it
can keep on spending money, and keep on doing things that no longer
And when begging fails, bullying them.
- 06:07am Aug 22, 2001 EST (#7985
Rip Van Rummy Awakes by MAUREEN DOWD http://www.nytimes.com/2001/08/22/opinion/22DOWD.html
.. is a distinguished piece, that ends with this line:
" How can the people who were supposed to know
how the world works not know anything about how the world
We have to be careful that the world does work -- that
things that need to be checked get checked, that things that need to
be discussed get discussed. It is important, now, that the truth not
be "somehow, too weak." The stakes are too high for that. Things
that can be checked, on which consequential action depends, need to
Things are being polarized so that both opportunities and dangers
are sharpening and strenthening. We could be involved with
readjustments that make the horrors of the Cold War a thing of the
past, and the world very much better. Or much worse.
- 06:31am Aug 22, 2001 EST (#7986
Bush is NOT my president.
Bush started NERVE WARS?
New York Times on the Web Forums Science