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 - 05:49pm Sep 18, 2001 EST (#9406 of 9420)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

FAIR goes on:

"Why They Hate Us

"As the media investigation focused on Osama bin Laden, news outlets still provided little information about what fuels his fanaticism. Instead of a serious inquiry into anti-U.S. sentiment in the Middle East and elsewhere, many commentators media offered little more than self-congratulatory rhetoric:

" [The World Trade Center and the Pentagon] have drawn, like gathered lightning, the anger of the enemies of civilization. Those enemies are always out there.... Americans are slow to anger but mighty when angry, and their proper anger now should be alloyed with pride. They are targets because of their virtues--principally democracy, and loyalty to those nations which, like Israel, are embattled salients of our virtues in a still-dangerous world." --George Will (Washington Post, 9/12/01)

" This nation symbolizes freedom, strength, tolerance, and democratic principles dedicated to both liberty and peace. To the tyrants, the despots, the closed societies, there are no alterations to the policies, no gestures we can make, no words we can say that will convince those determined to continue their hate." --Charles G. Boyd (Washington Post, 9/12/01)

" Are Americans afraid to face the reality that there is a significant portion of this world's population that hates America, hates what freedom represents, hates the fact that we fight for freedom worldwide, hates our prosperity, hates our way of life? Have we been unwilling to face that very difficult reality?" --Sean Hannity (Fox News Channel, 9/13/01)

" Our principled defense of individual freedom and our reluctance to intervene in the affairs of states harboring terrorists makes us an easy target." --Robert McFarlane (Washington Post, 9/13/01)

" One exception was ABC's Jim Wooten (World News Tonight, 9/12/01), who tried to shed some light on what might motivate some anti-U.S. sentiment in the Middle East, reporting that "Arabs see the U.S. as an accomplice of Israel, a partner in what they believe is the ruthless repression of Palestinian aspirations for land and independence." Wooten continued: "The most provocative issues: Israel's control over Islamic holy sites in Jerusalem; the stationing of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia near some of Islam's holiest sites; and economic sanctions against Iraq, which have been seen to deprive children there of medicine and food."

Fair says:

"Stories like Wooten's, which examine the U.S.'s highly contentious role in the Middle East and illuminate some of the forces that can give rise to violent extremism, contribute far more to public security than do pundits calling for indiscriminate revenge."

I agree.

rshowalter - 05:55pm Sep 18, 2001 EST (#9407 of 9420)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

If Americans want to increase the physical danger to Americans, all over the world, talking this way seems a fine way to do it.

It can't have escapted the notice of many people, either Americans or others, that we have now crafted a sociotechnical system that is enormously productive, but even so, so fragile that a very few couragious, dedicated men (call them fanatics or not, as you wish) can do astonishingly large amounts of damage.

The talk by the commentators above is talk of people who act as "Gods" -- or Nazi executioners -- who have not imagined that they can be vulnerable, too -- nor imagined that they should have empathy of the "others" they so easily advocate killing, maiming, and subjecting to devastating emotional losses.

And America is vulnerable indeed.

There are two excellent reasons why the Golden Rule , is an important rule, and needs to be considered in enough detail for real use with real people.

One excellent reason is empathy.

Another excellent reason is fear.

Perhaps they go together, for human animals as they actually are.

rshowalter - 06:06pm Sep 18, 2001 EST (#9408 of 9420)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

MD8354 rshowalter 9/2/01 6:25pm ... MD8355 rshowalter 9/2/01 7:18pm

almarst-2001 - 06:31pm Sep 18, 2001 EST (#9409 of 9420)

As I see a FEAR as essential ingradient of restraining the US, I am AGAINST the NMD and, at least for now as a counterbalance to US conventional military advantage, FOR AMD.

VERY UNFORTUNATLY!

rshowalter - 06:41pm Sep 18, 2001 EST (#9410 of 9420)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

VERY

And deterrance is essential.

But notice, and this last week has emphasized the technical reasons, that deterrance does not have to be nuclear.

lunarchick - 08:08pm Sep 18, 2001 EST (#9411 of 9420)
lunarchick@www.com

reading ^

(9 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense