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 - 04:20pm Sep 22, 2001 EST (#9661 of 9706)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

There are concerns about American foreign policy, including doctrines, expressed by Kissinger and others, that Friedman has said may "make Machiavelli sound like one of the Sisters of Mercy." It would be to the advantage of the United States to understand these concerns, and remove the basic reasons for them - - something that would not reduce any good thing about America. Objections that are right, and that can reasonably be corrected, should be corrected.

In Europe, Some Say the Attacks Stemmed From American Failings by STEVEN ERLANGER http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/22/international/europe/22DEBA.html

BERLIN, Sept. 21 — "The killing of thousands in the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington last week has prompted great unity of purpose in the United States, cemented by shared outrage. President Bush has called on the world to unite against barbarism.

"While Europeans have expressed enormous sympathy and solidarity, often in emotional ways, they have also been divided in their responses. A debate has begun over whether the inconsistencies of American foreign policy, and the sheer weight of American dominance in the world, mean that resentment of the United States — even, in extreme cases, hatred — are inevitable.

AUDIO - Interview With The Times's Berlin Bureau Chief, Steven Erlanger ... http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/092101begwer-audio.html

rshowalter - 04:22pm Sep 22, 2001 EST (#9662 of 9706)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Some of these concerns are absolutely central to the problems almarst has with both missile defense, and with nuclear disarmament - - problems that have taken and deserved much of this thread's space.

In Thinkers Face the Limits of a Just War By CELESTINE BOHLEN http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/22/arts/22JUST.html .... there is this:

"Stanley Hauerwas, a professor of theological ethics at the Duke Divinity School, . . . said he had been "absolutely dumbfounded" at the ease and haste with which Christian leaders in the United States adopted a belligerent stance that in his view is at odds with the teachings of their religion.

" Christians have a very hard time in America distinguishing themselves from the assumption that we are on board whatever America wants to do," he said. "Most American Christians are blank check people who believe we should go kill whoever the democratically elected American president says we should kill."

"Others also noted that the language used by political and religious leaders in the first days after the attack was particularly vengeful. ."

This blindness, which is due to a major propaganda effort, over many years, may be the major impediment to world peace, now. This blindness does not justify the terrorists, but it is the most credible justification they have, it is something many hundreds of millions of people around the world resent, and we should fix it.

Fixing it wouldn't cost America anything worth having.

lunarchick - 04:27pm Sep 22, 2001 EST (#9663 of 9706)
lunarchick@www.com

Phrases:

Bush administration's "new war council"

Anyone in here who can claim to have been a true credit to America?

-----

"absolutely dumbfounded" at the ease and haste with which Christian leaders in the United States adopted a belligerent stance

Shows that even these guys don't know the answer to question WHAT BUSINESS ARE WE IN? .. time for the churches to get their staff back on track regarding basic VISION STATEMENT

lunarchick - 04:29pm Sep 22, 2001 EST (#9664 of 9706)
lunarchick@www.com

Both the war council and the church employees are in the same business:

WORLD PEACE

Yet neither know it?

rshowalter - 04:32pm Sep 22, 2001 EST (#9665 of 9706)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Leaders of other nation states have no reason at all to let the US get away with this. Because many problems that would otherwise be soluble in the world are now insoluble, and circumstances are ugly, because of this American blindness.

That blindness, which is well illustrated in much of gisterme's posting, does us no credit, and makes us no money.

I hope that responsible leaders, world wide, use every persuasive resource at their disposal to see to it that this is set right -- something which is partly a matter of government policy, but largely a matter of discussions in a press that is somewhat insular, but nevertheless has many connections to the world outside the United States.

It would be useful, I believe, if people engaged in this dialog remembered how afraid Americans, including members of the press, actually are. http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7b085/193

rshowalter - 04:34pm Sep 22, 2001 EST (#9666 of 9706)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

lunarchick 9/22/01 4:29pm

Both "know it" in ways that have not been discussed, and logically connected, to a logically defensible closure.

And that closure needs to happen. It would happen much more easily if there was some leadership from outside the United States.

A while back, I made some comments about circumstances where people need help from the outside. I feel that they apply here.

(40 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense