[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 (174 previous messages)

rshow55 - 07:25pm Mar 3, 2002 EST (#175 of 187) Delete Message

Quite often, facts do get sorted out. We have a mess here. An extraordinarily large one.

A common ideology is not required.

Facts held in common is all that would be necessary get much better adjustments than now exist.

And indignation isn't helpful. Even though I understand it.

The mass media often DOES do things well. And the failings of the mass media exist, to some extent, everywhere.

If some fictions were under control, a lot would improve -- by ordinary interactions.

almarst-2001 - 07:28pm Mar 3, 2002 EST (#176 of 187)

20,000 Brits March Against War on Iraq -

almarst-2001 - 07:34pm Mar 3, 2002 EST (#177 of 187)

Last week, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals overturned one of the country’s last-remaining regulatory protections against media monopoly, and ordered the review of another -

almarst-2001 - 07:38pm Mar 3, 2002 EST (#178 of 187)

Britain should unhitch itself from the American war machine and oppose military action in Iraq -,1284,661100,00.html

almarst-2001 - 07:42pm Mar 3, 2002 EST (#179 of 187)

CIVILIAN OBJECTS WERE NATO'S MAIN TARGETS Deciphered shorthand records of Milosevic appearance at the Tribunal in Hague in February "When the Yugoslavian problem is touched upon, more and more people appear in the west as well, who appreciate the truth more than the comfort guaranteed by humiliating implementation of the political bosses’ instructions. It is to be mentioned here, the western mass media and global information networks have been used as a war instrument to tell the lies to the people. I am sure, the truth will be restored there, those people who lied about Yugoslavia, who turned the information war into a frontline war troops with many victims, will be held up to shame" More details... -

rshow55 - 07:48pm Mar 3, 2002 EST (#180 of 187) Delete Message

Protests are nice -- but often discounted.

almarst , you may remember some of this discussion, last March which I recorded in there was a good deal of suggested detail. The pattern wouldn't be particularly difficult, though it might require some funding - - if some world leader actually wanted to get some things to closure -- the level of funding required wouldn't be hard to get.

MD956 (now deleted) "It seems that nobody has anwers to our most basic questions about nuclear weapons, then the world needs them. . . . Answers can be gotten by press people -- more might be accomplished Goals:

" Establishing FACTS beyond reasonable doubt - and explaining these facts very broadly.


" Crafting a fully workable, fully complete, fully explained "draft treaty proposal" for nuclear disarmament and a more militarily stable world. Such drafting would, at the least, make for stunningly good journalism -- that could be widely syndicated among papers. Useful as that would be, I think the drafting would serve a much more useful purpose. That purpose would be actually getting the points that need to be worked out for increased stability and nuclear disarmament set out coherently - - to a level where closure actually occurs. That would involve a great deal of staff work done coherently, quickly, and in coordinated fashion.

" work . . . . done IN PUBLIC --- say if some Moscow Times staff, and people from a couple of US papers, some Guardian staff, and people from some interested governments, started an OPEN dialog together.

closing March 12

" Historically, presidents left a power vacuum in American nuclear policy, and people like LeMay and his proteges, and people in the CIA, and some contractors, filled it. And now, that conspiracy, long past any legitimate usefulness, and long since financially corrupt, is menacing the peace of the whole world, and imposing huge costs on innocent people. "

Maybe I'm wrong about the facts. But the facts need to be established, for good decision making, and if some leaders wanted to get those facts established, they could be. It would be an easy enough thing -- and would involve negligible risks to the leaders. But it would require a level of interest and status that would require leadership.

rshow55 - 08:03pm Mar 3, 2002 EST (#181 of 187) Delete Message

MD50 almarst-2001 3/1/02 11:21pm ... MD80 almarst-2001 3/2/02 8:22am
(In MD80 almarst asks an important question, simple in essentials, that will take effort to establish to the level of certainty that count.)

MD81 rshow55 3/2/02 8:42am ... MD82 rshow55 3/2/02 8:45am

Facts, especially technical ones, can be checked to closure.
MD84 rshow55 3/2/02 10:52am

It takes a certain amount of force and status, to get it done effectively. In comparison to the stakes, only a tiny amount. But some.

More Messages Recent Messages (6 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