[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 (86 previous messages)

rshow55 - 11:47am Mar 2, 2002 EST (#87 of 120) Delete Message

Life is complex, and there are enormous numbers of people and things in the United States that are admirable and beautiful. You can see a great deal that is wonderful, in and about this country, by reading The New York Times .

The good things don't have to be forgotten to deal with the bad.

The need for arrangements based on checkable facts, and reasons that can stand the light of day, is very great.

Discomfort with US policy is widespread, and likely to deepen.

. Europe Seethes as the U.S. Flies Solo in World Affairs by STEVEN ERLANGER

"Europe's solidarity with the Bush administration, declared so quickly after Sept. 11, has faded almost as suddenly."

If some leaders of major countries actually encouraged some fact-finding -- and some discussions to closure in public -- before umpires -- a great deal could be done. It would have to rise to a level that could be called "news." And the countries involved might have to face some awkward facts, as well.

One very clear place to start would be missile defense, where the disparity between any reasonable US national interest and the interest of the military-industrial complex is particularly blatant and clear.

lchic - 02:15pm Mar 2, 2002 EST (#88 of 120)

Toastmasters mAzzA don't go around calling people stupid! Rather they help people to grow. Which raises a doubt in my mind regarding your claim to Toastmaster affiliation.

You state America is about freedom .....

    The president's sentiments were no doubt sincere, as is his muscular pursuit of the killers. But there is still scant evidence to suggest that he condones the idea of a free press. Not since the Nixon years has an administration done as much to stymie reporters who specialize in the genre of investigative inquiry Mr. Pearl was pursuing when he was ambushed. Now as then, the administration is equally determined to thwart journalists whether they're looking into a war abroad or into possible White House favors for a lavish campaign contributor who has fallen into legal peril (Ken Lay now, Robert Vesco then). see
Yet the 'shadow' government isn't for freedom!

lchic - 02:29pm Mar 2, 2002 EST (#89 of 120)

    Vietnam War, said they will report ``extraordinarily'' high levels of cancer-causing dioxin in people living in heavily sprayed areas see
USA Presidents and advisors make decisions for 'others_elsewhere' that would be totally unacceptable in their 'homeland'!

lchic - 02:32pm Mar 2, 2002 EST (#90 of 120)

Palestinians and Isrealis
are both ... A R A B S ... if the Middle East were thought of in secular terms .. then .. both could fuse into one State with secular government.

almarst-2001 - 02:34pm Mar 2, 2002 EST (#91 of 120)

lchic 3/2/02 2:15pm

Freedom of reporting in the media...

To paraphrase Reagan, "one's man reporter is another's propagandist".

Remember the bombing of Serbian TV?

The blowing up the Al Jaseera office in Kabul?

The "friendly sugestions" for "good behavier" to US networks?

And then the "Office for Strutegic Influence"... Which would never lie to the American Public. Never said the same about foreigners. An interestin role-model and the lesson for the youth: "The lie is bad, except when you can benefit from it" Fair enough.

lchic - 02:53pm Mar 2, 2002 EST (#92 of 120)


    Any two waves can combine and interfere with each other.
    If they add the result is a bigger wave. This is called CONSTRUCTIVE INTERFERENCE.
    If they combine and cancel it's called DESTRUCTIVE INTERFERENCE.
    see graphic
Looking for constructive interference to get the Missiles DOWN!

mazza9 - 02:55pm Mar 2, 2002 EST (#93 of 120)
Louis Mazza


Are you a Toastmaster?

In 500 words or more please fail to answer this question.


lchic - 03:03pm Mar 2, 2002 EST (#94 of 120)

fail ... ?

Toastmasters are from the WIN-WIN world mAzzA!

mazza9 - 03:09pm Mar 2, 2002 EST (#95 of 120)
Louis Mazza


As expected, you did not answer the question.

Gee..I wonder.. is that like a LIE?


lchic - 03:13pm Mar 2, 2002 EST (#96 of 120)

the board has been distanced ... as responses are processed ..... keep watching this spot

More Messages Recent Messages (24 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