[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 (684 previous messages)

almarst-2001 - 11:14pm Mar 18, 2002 EST (#685 of 715)


The KAL 700 was shot down over Russian territory. Not that I approve it. But one must recognise the difference.

You are just trying to hide behing a see-trough glass.

lchic - 12:17am Mar 19, 2002 EST (#686 of 715)

US couldn't tell a Passenger Plane from a war plane ...

US falling behind on the health and safety score re Camp X-ray:
being seen through wire

    Heathy sleep demands 'darkness'
    Not providing such conditions is a health hazard / torture
    That the US has to keep the lights-on to see in the dark begs the question -
    'What happened to night time surveillance equipment' ...

mazza9 - 05:09pm Mar 19, 2002 EST (#687 of 715)
Louis Mazza


KAL 007 was struck by the Soviet missile while over Shakalin Island. It proceeded for 12 more minutes and eventually came to rest at the botton of the Sea of Japan, well outside the 12 mile limit.

Lchic: The Soviet Pilot identified the B-747 and was ordered to shoot it down, even though this was a commercial airliner. The Iranian airliner was not broadcasting required air traffic control codes. The Iranian pilot was in error and as such there was nothing for President Bush to comment about.

Commercial airliners have crossed war zones without any trouble for many decades. In 1968 I attended an Air Force Staff Officer School. A classmate of mine had just returned from Viet Nam where he flew 100 missions in F-105s, mostly over the North. After 50 missions he was given R&R and he flew to Hong Kong from Bangkok Thailand. He stated that it was one of life's ironies that he had crossed over Hanoi on his R&R trip and had experienced no problems when, days earlier, he was flying over Hanoi in an F-105 loaded with 16ea 500lb bombs. Needless to say there were no SAMs or AAA to avoid while flying to Hong Kong on the B-727!


almarst-2001 - 05:46pm Mar 19, 2002 EST (#688 of 715)

"The Iranian pilot was in error and as such there was nothing for President Bush to comment about."

No comments.

rshow55 - 06:41pm Mar 19, 2002 EST (#689 of 715) Delete Message

I wonder if Mazza even understands how ugly his stance is -- to people who think of human beings as human beings?

manjumicha2001 - 07:01pm Mar 19, 2002 EST (#690 of 715)

It is just hilarious to observe the interaction between Rouis and you guys. I mean, after all, you guys are supposed to be experts at "ways of clear communications" to solve the world's problems....but ah! the question is 'do you speak the same language with your counterparts?"

You see, the language of Rouis is that of a military man. What excites him is force capabilities, not moral sensibilities, which he has been trained all his life to think of as a luxury the true warriers can't afford to have. So, no matter how much "outrage" you guys express at his cool, matter of fact, statements, it just doesn't register in his brain as an important issue, don't you get it?

On the other hand, you start talking about the range of the new tepodong-2 ICBMs and how it will wipe out Chicago unless Bush comes riding in with his NMD shot-guns drawn ready to save the nation, he is all ears so to speak....

In a comical way, your interaction with Rouis shows how ridiculous all of your posturings re: the enlightened role of communications in international conflict resolutions really are.

Sadly, Rouis and his types represent the realities of this world (more academic term would be Kissinger's "real politik") and only thing preventing them (or us) from destroying others is...that's right....fear, a big existential fear of the other's capability to destroy yourselves. Sadly fear of G-D ain't gonna cut it for these guys, notwithstanding occasional Sunday outings....:-)

manjumicha2001 - 07:09pm Mar 19, 2002 EST (#691 of 715)

That is, Sunday outings to the church. Just wanted to make sure Rouis doesn't take it as an outing to the gun range, although, as any decent member of NRA would say, G-d is indeed present at the Gun range as well in the mist of gun powder and the sweet sounds of M16s & Uzi blasts .

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