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?

southerncross - 09:46am Aug 22, 2001 EST (#7994 of 8012)

"Russian military leaders have expressed concern about US plans for a national missile defense system"

Land based, perhaps, but I doubt that a sea-based system would bother them, at all - especially if they wanted to be included from the start.

vpekelman - 09:53am Aug 22, 2001 EST (#7995 of 8012)

It is absolutely absurd about how the United States is going about VIOLATING (not withdrawing as they diplomatically like to say) the ABM Treaty. It clearly shows Unites States arrogance and lack of courtesy to his allies. Doesn't anybody worry about the fact that the whole world is against this, even US allies? There must be something seriously wrong here... I sincerely hope that Russia doesn't give in... but I'm sure that somehow US will find a way to get their cooperation. After all Russia cannot afford to turn down any last minute 'gifts'.

lunarchick - 09:56am Aug 22, 2001 EST (#7996 of 8012)
lunarchick@www.com

U.S. Envoy in Talks

MOSCOW (Reuters) — A senior U.S. envoy held arms consultations in Moscow on Tuesday but both sides were keeping expectations muted, awaiting the results of a Pentagon review that is to allow Washington to put firm numbers on the table for arms cuts. Undersecretary of State John Bolton met Russian arms negotiator Georgy Mamedov, a deputy foreign minister. Bolton is the third senior U.S. security official to visit Russia since presidents George W. Bush and Vladimir Putin agreed at a summit in Italy last month to hold new consultations. www.themoscowtimes.com

southerncross - 09:58am Aug 22, 2001 EST (#7997 of 8012)

"Innovation is too far down the line"

But, not to see where it is going. The last few posts have talked about a sunk sub and a little germ warfare.

The bold face print hints at the "worst".

How do you define innovation?

southerncross - 10:02am Aug 22, 2001 EST (#7998 of 8012)

"Whilst" is an interesting word to use while quoting the Moscow Times.

Let me guess. Britain wants in, too.

raoduff - 10:05am Aug 22, 2001 EST (#7999 of 8012)

I simply cannot contain my anger and my dismay at this latest news from our Administration. This policy is misguided and blind, blind to the danger it put us all in, meaning the world. This bullying and self-serving behavior on our part, coupled with absurd rationalizations with regard to how Russia should behave (trying to pin the responsibility for failure of diplomacy on them) is more of the same double-speak for which our nation has become renowned!

I see the time for protest of this misguided policy upon us now! The world is already dangerous enough without a less than intelligent President and his equally dangerous, and evil, minions, messing up the Peace for all of us.

rshowalter - 10:19am Aug 22, 2001 EST (#8000 of 8012)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

lunarchick 8/22/01 9:44am .. is great stuff !

Getting things to fit in different people's heads -- getting things to work from different contexts - the exposition has to have some diversity, too. Even if perfection is attainable for a specific context, there are many contexts, and the need for different patterns of exposition, different correllations with argument and evidence, at different levels of detail.

At many stages, getting things checked matters -- because errors can propogate. These are common problems, that human organizations handle, in various ways, all the time.

The exposition job is a hard one. The problem of getting credibility is a hard one. The problems involved with proceeding with grace and fairness is a hard one. The problem of touching, not just minds, but the emotions that necessarily connect to consequential action is a hard one.

But with the internet, and its greatly expanded memory and tolerance for complexity -- and with the accumulation of expository power in organizations like the TIMES - more is possible than used to be.

The analogies to litigation of technical matters are pretty close. Procedures that work for "discovery" are fairly close to many informally used on this thread. Procedures that work for TRIAL -- where "laymen" have to make judgements, and results have to be clear at many levels -- are different -- and not yet done.

But there's hope of getting FACTS, on which so much depends, clarified here -- and doing it in ways that work for a very wide range of people, from a very wide range of different perspectives. How we FEEL about facts may be very different. But some technical issues -- once subject to examination, by fair rules, with fair umpiring when needed -- aren't subject to substantial question.

Sometimes pictures really ARE worth a thousand words.

MD6689 lunarchick 7/6/01 1:38pm shows some beautiful pictures from the Hubble Space Telescope

Dec-97- Hubble Butterfly http://www.astrophys.org/high_2001.html

MD6690 rshowalter 7/6/01 1:46pm

With these pictures, one can get a feel for what "resolution" means. And get a sense of how wonderful the resolution of Hubble is.

But it isn't nearly good enough to make lasar space weapons practical.

Combining facts, connected solidly to evidence, to arguments that can be understood in context, points can be made clear.

For a number of reasons, involving issues like resolution -- issues of numbers and in details -- the overwhelming mass of what the Bush administration wants to fund for Star Wars isn't workable.

It will take work to show that - - and may take some force, formal or informal, to get key parties involved. But getting clarity on key points, "beyond a reasonable doubt" - - and in ways all can see -- is something that can be done.

(12 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense