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?

rshowalter - 04:14pm Sep 4, 2001 EST (#8438 of 8469)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Ways to check come hard, and communication's a SERIOUS problem. And some places where it looks clear -- it isn't.

The kind of precision and multiple constraint set out in the NUNN-WOLFOWITZ TASK FORCE REPORT http://164.109.59.52/library/pdf/nunnwolfowitz.pdfis built to distort and hide things. Which is beautiful for controlling information flows so that "enemies" can't understand anything much -- but ugly when the communication that collaboration actually takes is being attempted.

All the checks and crosschecks and detail in the Nunn-Wolfkowitz report -- which really is "Cold War Best Practice" -- just puts too many barriers in the way of understanding. Too much of a load on human energy and understanding -- so detailed communication to focus, between different groups, can never happen. Not enough communication happens for focus, for comfort levels, for action. That is, the procedures do what they are built to do, and rule out what they are built to rule out.

We need less classification, and more communication, every which way.

Collaborations, win-win situations, are hard to come by, but those are the new relationships that we need. They take islands of "common ground" where needs can be met, and problems avoided.

It takes a lot of talking, and checking, and cross-checking -- and closure is hard enough, no matter how open things are.

Barriers can make "win-win" relationships impossible.

rshowalter - 04:18pm Sep 4, 2001 EST (#8439 of 8469)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

And the multiple constraints involved MD8300 rshowalter 9/1/01 3:52pm are scarier when you consider how "imprecise" the "precise words" can really be.

Dawn Riley - searched the dictionary of military terms under "threat" , and got 36 different entries . Each a http citation, not a clear definiton. http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/doddict/

Try THAT when you're scared, and in a hurry! ... MD699 rshowalter 2/17/01 2:05pm

This is the situation after nearly half a century of negotiation -- in a lot of places -- gross ambiguity, inconventiently packaged.

We have to communicate more clearly than that. We can. I think some of what has to happen is coming into focus on this thread.

lunarchick - 04:34pm Sep 4, 2001 EST (#8440 of 8469)
lunarchick@www.com

Showalter wrt refugees flowing out of Afghanistan. It seems that country has 50 tribes, only Taliban extreme rightism is tolerated. Wanting to flee would be in the minds of all women and those from the remaining 49 tribes. This puts strains on the world. It put strains on the borders. My understanding here is that 3million people are on the Pakistan-Afghan border and are driven back into their home country as and when .. only to leave. They are denied cover from nightfall/sun by Pakistan ... who wouldn't want to encourage them.

It seems there's occasion to have a world 'banker' in such situations who debits a country that sends so many out of it's borders. Were Afghanistan to be debited in this way .. it might at least slow down it's capacity to buy the tools of war.

rshowalter - 04:35pm Sep 4, 2001 EST (#8441 of 8469)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Russians feel a deep need for some limitations on US power. And these issues, and the reasons for them, have been much discussed on this thread.

It took me a long time to come to imagine, and then appreciate most (still not all) of almarst's point of view.
MD949 almarstel2001 3/12/01 11:07am ... MD950 almarstel2001 3/12/01 11:36am

Things have been so completely concealed between the US and Russia that there is a great deal of distrust, and deep fear. Some of it there because, for many years, we wanted it to be there.

Questions that people feel strongly about, that effect security (and the mission statement of the Nuclear Threat Initiative) have to be dealt with.

Not "classified" out of discussion.

Because the consequences of these concerns can't be "classified out of existence" when it comes time for action.

Win-win situations require rational trust -- the kind that can be checked.

Even tolerable compromises usually do.

rshowalter - 04:38pm Sep 4, 2001 EST (#8442 of 8469)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

That's a great idea. If people can be held accountable for the human damages they do -- even a little -- it might eliminate some horrors.

I wonder what would happen if military forces got charged $50,000 bucks, or even $5000 bucks, for every "innocent bystander" they killed -- and the fees stuck. Folks would be more careful, and some tactics might change.

lunarchick - 04:40pm Sep 4, 2001 EST (#8443 of 8469)
lunarchick@www.com

Celebrity visits camps .. even so, who is she?

(26 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense