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
(818 previous messages)
- 01:53pm Mar 25, 2002 EST (#819
- 02:23pm Mar 25, 2002 EST (#820
How appropriate pattern to this day.....a pyscho devising the US
strategic plans toward the world at large....it starts to make
- 02:36pm Mar 25, 2002 EST (#821
On nuclear preparedness, few have the pulse of the nation like
the incomparable Onion:
- 02:58pm Mar 25, 2002 EST (#822
Some of the key assumptions of US strategy -- especially the ones
that are recipes for endless fighting and deception -- are being
taken apart - losing credibility -- all over the world.
3/24/02 8:00am quotes Robert Fuller:
"... The people of the earth are in a most
dangerous passage. We have only the barest knowledge of each
other, after centuries of relative isolation. And a little
learning is a dangerous thing. We must move rapidly to reduce the
danger, so greatly enhanced by nuclear weapons technology, by
learning enough more about each other to overcome the fright of
first encounter. Paradoxically, it is technology that makes this
awkward passage both necessary and possible."
The world has made a lot of progress along that passage. ... Some
kinds of patterns, that sustain wars, are less powerful and
less stable than they used to be.
From a "game" point of view, some major thrusts of the United
States are acting to "set up" wars with N. Korea, Iraq, Iran, and,
perhaps, the whole Arab world. But that isn't everything, as far as
US actions go - - and there are other actors in the world who are
taking a hand.
Militaries, by the logic of their function, work to set up wars -
and the only termination of a war that they ever see as acceptable
is "total victory" -- by which they mean the extermination or total
overpowering of the other side. That's built into the logic of
military function, just as the need to restrict information flow is
built in -- just as the need to lie is built in.
There are other logics, too. And other institutions. One can't
ask militaries to change certain basic things. Moreover, there
are times when societies have no choice but to fight. But the
US has become dangerously dominated by military interests and
patterns, that need to be subordinated - and resisted intelligently
and effectively by other nations in the world.
It seems to be happening. Maybe we don't have to get to the point
of slaughter with Iraq, N. Korea, Iran, and the whole Arab world.
Maybe something else might be worked out . . . .
People and institutions are more sophisticated than they used to
be, and I've got some hope.
. . . . . . . . . . .
If the US and Russia have their arsenals under decent control -
so they don't "go off like a string of firecrackers" - - then the
world is facing less risk of slaughter than it was in 1914 - - or in
1938 - - which isn't all the comfort you could wish for - but it is
something. Maybe we're getting smarter. Hope so. And hope we're
industious and lucky enough, this time . . . .
- 05:06pm Mar 25, 2002 EST (#823
China successfully launched its third unmanned space ship,
Shenjou 3, this morning. This follows a successful robot-arm
experiment conducted a few months ago. Aside from the civilian
applications which include their long-term lunar base plan, these
systems will provide the foundations for their own space-based
warfare system in conjunction wiht their own GPS systems being
launched since a few years ago. I doubt you will see much reports on
these in the US media, including NYT......:-)
Anyway, to pop the typical paradigm (bovine excrement, that is)
that defines the US public discussion of NMD against NK, it is
likely that NK and China have started coooperating in the the areas
of common NMD countermeasure and space-based weapons system
capabilities........it will be interesting to see how Bush and hsi
big-mouth foreign policy team will speed up such process even
- 06:16pm Mar 25, 2002 EST (#824
" I doubt you will see much reports on these in the US media,
including NYT......:-) "
The NYT seems rather inclined to let the public to chew the
candies out of Mr. Friedman's mouth..;)
It is quite possible the US's MD will force China and Russia to
join into common deterrance aliance and military/space technology
development. If they have a slightest believe the MD may work to
I haven't seen this to be discussed either - the notion that MD
may be seen as a danger to Russia and particularely, the China's
national security and their possible response.
- 08:16pm Mar 25, 2002 EST (#825
China's national security may relate to it's social treatment of
labour as new economic process is introduced. How to move from a
labour rich to a process economy that sets out to improve it's
own standards and become more competitive internationally will be a
bigger transition than any rocket-firing propaganda status ploy.
China is said to collect on 14% in taxes, and doesn't have the
reserves to offer unemployment dollars as vast numbers of people are
displaced. The people have been left out of the China planner
strategy ... yet societies are made up of people who have continual
needs ... satisfied via a wage.
- 08:31pm Mar 25, 2002 EST (#826
"The people have been left out of the China planner
It seems the improving the living standard has being a China's
priority for the past couple of decades.
Do you suggest they should try the "russian experiment"?
China was trying before to leap from an agrarian underdeveloped
poor country into the modern society. Remember the "Big Jump"?
Unfortunatly, it may be forced to spend a lot of needed resorces
New York Times on the Web Forums