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
(321 previous messages)
- 11:24am Mar 10, 2002 EST (#322
And, isn't it enough to declare yourself as the greatest
democracy and defender of freedom to destroy all who may not see it
- 11:48am Mar 10, 2002 EST (#323
So you're a Leninist. How nice. I subscribe to Jesus the prince
of PEACE. You quote Lenin a de faco murderer.
I knew that there was no chance of logic where you are concerned.
You are programmed and unable to think for yourself. To bad.
I don't subsribe to anyone's death. Suitcase nuclear weapons were
developed by your mentor's society. The Soviet Union subscribed to
any and all weapons to achieve their end. That's why there are
suitcase nucs and they are "on the market." but you won't acknowlege
that. Your culpability is the destabilizing force in the world. You
are the evil one and trying to deflect the reality of your position
is the challenge to world peace.
I for one happen to be an optimist who believes that if mankind
can focus on and try to attain a higher order accomplishment, SPACE,
all of mankind benefits.
I must admit that I did meet with my conspirators last night. Our
plans are complete and our agents are spreading out all over America
with only one thing to accomplish. Last night I attended the
National Accordian Convention in Plano Texas and our goal is the
spreading of music, understanding and fellowship to all of mankind.
- 12:22pm Mar 10, 2002 EST (#324
almarst , I think you're doing great posting.
I found your reference http://www.bernal.co.uk/Research/Racak.html
3/10/02 12:54am very interesting. Compelling. Disturbing.
A central question is how we check facts (including some in the
reference you posted) how we relate facts together, and how we fit
those facts into ideas and patterns that matter to us, for
understanding, for ordering of relationships, and for justification
of what we do.
"Facts" alone, whether they are right or wrong can't do anything.
They are inputs into decisions by people who have power of
decision about something.
Facts and ideas, combined together in space and time so that
people can "connect the dots", as Erica Goode says in Finding
Answers In Secret Plots http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/10/weekinreview/10GOOD.html
form the ideas that people and groups have. -- These ideas are
patterns, which work well enough to sustain action and belief in
some ways, though they may be totally invalid otherwise. These
ideas, constructed by "connecting the dots" may produce grossly
pathological results -- fueling hatred, wars, and cycles of
poverty. Or they may be correct.
To judge that, one checks the "facts" "connected together" and
one sees if the pattern conjured up fits more facts - -
including many more facts. The process of judging this, like the
process of putting the "explanation" together - happens in people's
minds - and can't be forced. But the matching process -- the
"connecting of the dots" -- is what effective persuasion is all
about. And the internet offers new ways, some shown here, of
connecting information in space and time that would otherwise be
diffused and unconnectable. That's a source of new opportunities.
In the case of Missile Defense, facts and relations set out and
referenced in MD84 rshow55
3/2/02 10:52am can be connected up to show how much fraud, how
much muddle, has motivated much of American defense policy. Setting
out the facts, and discussing connection of the dots, takes work --
and is important to the extent that people with power care about the
answers, and follow the logic.
The more well validated "dots" -- the more valid, checkable
things that have to fit together at the same time, the less the
chances for horror.
Some of the most horrible things in history - most perhaps, and
most now, are based on "ideas" that have been crazy - grossly out of
proportion -- ideas that neglect important things -- among them the
humanity of real human beings.
We're living in a terrible time. Facts alone aren't going to
solve anything. But facts, considered together, and considered, may
help solve a great deal.
But it seems to me that if enough people, including leaders, get
concerned enough, we have some soluble problems here. If they do
not, we don't.
- 12:24pm Mar 10, 2002 EST (#325
It also seems to me that there's great stuff in the TIMES today.
I find the image which accompanies Goode's piece, terribly
haunting. We need to understand, and deal with, irrational forces
and emotions -- lest manageable, modifiable stresses between
civilizations become causes for massive injury and death.
There's another image I find haunting - of a man reduced to
selling a child . . . in Children as Barter in a Famished
Land By BARRY BEARAK http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/08/international/asia/08HUNG.html
Many horrors seem not only terrible, but strange , and
stupid . Including many of the worst horrors. Maybe there's
New York Times on the Web Forums