[F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  /

    Missile Defense

Technology has always found its greatest consumer in a nation's war and defense efforts. Since the last attempts at a "Star Wars" defense system, has technology changed considerably enough to make the latest Missile Defense initiatives more successful? Can such an application of science be successful? Is a militarized space inevitable, necessary or impossible?

Read Debates, a new Web-only feature culled from Readers' Opinions, published every Thursday.

Earliest Messages Previous Messages Recent Messages Outline (82 previous messages)

mazza9 - 10:12am Mar 2, 2002 EST (#83 of 96)
Louis Mazza

lchic: You didn't answer my question, as I suspected you wouldn't.

It is my Toastmasters because the real secret of the United States is we are a multifaceted society where individuals make up the institutions. Any two people with a common interest evenutally will gravitate together and form a club, organization or institution. It's the people stupid!

To say there is no freedom in the United States belies the fact that just being able to participate in this forum is a freedom that is not enjoyed everywhere on this planet.

Have we shown our human side throughout our history. Definitely. Is this humanity the basis by which we have strived for and achieved the wealth and power you are so jealous of. Probably!

You seem mired in the past, although I believe that there are people in the world who revel in it.

Posit! If I can show someone in power as being immoral and I can state that my behavior would have been moral then I'm "better" than that individual and should be elevated in everyone's eyes. You see this in the Truman decision to use the A-Bomb on Japan. "I'm better than Truman since I wouldn't have dropped the bomb". Maybe this is why you're mired in the Eisenhower and Nixon era.

BTW using the A-Bomb in Viet Nam has absolutely nothing to do with this forum's topic, but hey you and Showalter will never be accused of staying on point.


rshow55 - 10:52am Mar 2, 2002 EST (#84 of 96) Delete Message

Technical discussion has been pretty dense so far.

MD14 rshow55 3/1/02 6:07pm summarizes a great deal of discourse on the previous MD thread -- was set out at MD11896 -- and hasn't been contested on any technical details. . It was also posted on .. Psychwar, Casablanca, and Terror

MD15 rshow55 3/1/02 6:10pm

Key References: MD20 rshow55 3/1/02 6:45pm

MD34 rshow55 3/1/02 7:51pm ... MD35 manjumicha2001 3/1/02 7:59pm
MD36 rshow55 3/1/02 8:12pm

MD47 rshow55 3/1/02 9:10pm ... MD59 rshow55 3/2/02 5:48am

almarst-2001 - 11:01am Mar 2, 2002 EST (#85 of 96)

As mazza and gisterme proclaim the nobel intentions of US policy of sucrificing millions of other nation's populations in a name of freedom and democracy, how would they explain the US support for the bludiest dictators it helped to establish in so many places around the World? Frequently by overturning the democratically elected governments. Just because those didn't line up to the US "national" interests being it OIL, strutegic geographical location or ideology? How come the US supports the regimes which could be futher away from democraties as Saudi Arabia or Kuwait? The countries which could make the Taliban to look like a progressive enlightments.

While it seems easy to feed the American public at large - probably the most ignorant and least interested or educated about the rest of the World - with such lies, such claims, actively promoted by mass Media and Holliwood, put the US better educated and population in a shamefull and agonizing position. They either have to be seen as dishonest or unpatriotic.

In my view, such an internal conflict between the proclaimed aims and actual deeds is very dangerous and will lead to ultimate cinicizm of the best and brightest of the nation. Unless the Americans are indeed a different Human species.

The depth of hypocrisy came to the even brighter light after the Sept. 11. When the majority of Americans clearly prefered less freedom for more protection and safety. The choice they would and still are prepered to deny from any other nation if it fits their "interests". By economic and political pressure and even by military force.

My conclusion is that dangerously too many of Americans can't open their eyes to the mirrow, can't see themself in the eyes of others. Or do not recognise how shamefully distorted is the image provided by the mass Media and Holliwood. As long as they got an image they like so much better.

This may not be entirely unique for the US. However, the degree of ignorance and arrogance toward the surrounding World is unprecedented among developed nations.

It could be funny if not for the fact that this nation took the mission to lead and rule the World. Even by force. Without much hesitation.

There is a huge difference between technological advancement and enlightment. Between Money and Arms and Civilization. Between Real quality of life and "American Dream". Between the "Pop culture" and Culture. Between Freedom to Chose and freedom to Follow.

rshow55 - 11:17am Mar 2, 2002 EST (#86 of 96) Delete Message

Almarst, you're absolutely right. There is a huge difference between technological advancement and enlightment.

Lies are dangerous and ugly -- and because the US is powerful, its lies are not only dangerous and ugly to itself, but to the whole world.

Getting lies resolved is in part a technical , in part a political problem -- and in part a moral problem.

Here are key questions -- and they have been bothering me. We "normally" assume that people face facts, whenever they can.

But what if it is expensive to acknowledge a fiction, or a fraud?

What if it is worth money to perpetrate a fiction, or a fraud?

These are essential questions, and there are no general answers. But the questions, as they relate to the US military-industrial complex, American foreign policy, and American technical-political frauds, including "missile defense" need better answers than we now have.

Partly that's a technical question. Partly that's a question that will require some limited but real engagement from influentials elsewhere in the world - people in a position to raise the costs of lying, and make the mechanics of lying more difficult than it is.

More Messages Recent Messages (10 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Email to Sysop  Your Preferences

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  / Missile Defense

Home | Site Index | Site Search | Forums | Archives | Shopping

News | Business | International | National | New York Region | NYT Front Page | Obituaries | Politics | Quick News | Sports | Science | Technology/Internet | Weather
Editorial | Op-Ed

Features | Arts | Automobiles | Books | Cartoons | Crossword | Games | Job Market | Living | Magazine | Real Estate | Travel | Week in Review

Help/Feedback | Classifieds | Services | New York Today

Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company