New York Times on the Web Forums
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
(223 previous messages)
- 03:34pm Mar 5, 2002 EST (#224
3/4/02 9:46am ... MD199 lchic
The more one looks at the technical situation on "missile
defense" -- the clearer it is that it is nothing but a waste,
tactically. Countermeasures certain to defeat it, or reduce its
chances of a hit to a negligible value, may cost as little as a
millionth of the cost of the system itself.
Though, as Stephen Weinberg points out in Can Missile Defense
The New York Review of Books February 14, 2002 .. the system
might work as a stunt. . The piece, which does not treat
countermeasures very extensively, and therefore draws relatively
"optimistic" conclusions about feasility nevertheless ends
" . . In seeking to deploy a national missile
defense aimed at an implausible threat, a defense that would have
dubious effectiveness against even that threat, and that on
balance would harm our security more than it helps it, the Bush
administration seems to be pursuing a pure rather than applied
missile defenseó a missile defense that is undertaken for its own
sake, rather than for any application it may have in defending our
country." (emphasis added.)
We have fictions here - - linked to circumstances that are
dangerous, and not in the interest of the United States considered
as a nation.
- 06:39pm Mar 5, 2002 EST (#225
Hi there. I'm Sean, the host for this forum. I usually take a
hands-off approach, but I'd like to remind posters that multiple
posting is not always the best way to get your point across.
Let's try to tone down the volume and let other people get their
- 12:02am Mar 6, 2002 EST (#226
Please leave rshow alone. Notwithstanding our lack of responses,
we do read his postins with interest from time to time. They are in
most cases pretty important contributions to your forum, i think.
You are right that "fiction" often serves as the basis for
national "vision" of the prior, current and future regimes (whether
they are despotic or not). AT the same time, however, the fictional
ideology of a regime is often sustained and reinforced by the harsh
and unavoidable realities of the nation or people (which is host to
any particular regime and its "fictional" ideologies). They often do
contront very real and cruel threat to their existence. For example,
NK's juche ideology might be a monstrous fiction but it was born out
of, and nurtured by, 50 year-long US-led economic, political and
military embargo of that nation coupled with overt nuclear threats
to its existence. Even China and Soviets had to either change the
nature of their regimes (in case of China) or crumble (in case of
Soviet) under the weight of cold war won by US. NK chose an opposite
path, which was summed up by its representative in Tokyo as follows:
"We chose to be hungry wolves in the wild than tamed house dogs". I
do not believe this sentiment is a "fiction" to them.
Another example might be the myth of "Zionism" for jewish
diaspora. I suspect that considering the horrors of pograms
throughout centries, a jewish person's (even if he/she was born and
raised and spent entire life in US and never visited Israel in his
while entire life) choice to "return" can't be said to be based on a
'mythical" hope for Zion even by the most ardent critique of Zionism
as a viable national vision....
- 12:56am Mar 6, 2002 EST (#227
ManJ - on North Korea - said:
NK's juche ideology might be a monstrous fiction but it was
born out of, and nurtured by, 50 year-long US-led economic,
political and military embargo of that nation coupled with overt
nuclear threats to its existence. A thought here is:
Is there general awareness of this Fifty Year Policy .. was it
said and restated (?), or, are such policies hidden in the shadows
out of the light where the general public have neither awareness
nor opportunity to comment or give input. Apart from rallies
and street marches when the public get aroused and incensed .. how
does JaneJoePublic have input into foreign policy?
- 01:02am Mar 6, 2002 EST (#228
Sean people have every opportunity to 'get their thoughts
in' they just post .. NYT threads are world threads - people
post in their time zones (perhaps multiply) - often 'others' are not
available at that specific time.
The board is a renewed board of that which ran from
Sept2000 to last week - with 11,000 postings.
(NYTsomewhere) - go check
Showalter is 'the appointed one' to
re-introduce valuable key points.
Regarding Missile Defence the big question -
Why are 'Useless dangerous antique nuclear weapons' not
taken down ...
Why still used as strategic pawns one decade post cold war?!
- 01:15am Mar 6, 2002 EST (#229
If only these millionaires devoted their 'spiritual time' to
cleaning up the missile mess! http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/asia-pacific/newsid_1856000/1856302.stm
"People get a sense of satisfaction and sense of
pride from contributing to society," she said. "People become
spiritually wealthy because when you help others you actually help
- 02:40am Mar 6, 2002 EST (#230
Chick .. with steel underbelly? http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/02/international/europe/02POUL.html
- 02:44am Mar 6, 2002 EST (#231
New York Times on the Web Forums