New York Times Readers Opinions
The New York Times

Home
Job Market
Real Estate
Automobiles
News
International
National
Washington
Business
Technology
Science
Health
Sports
New York Region
Education
Weather
Obituaries
NYT Front Page
Corrections
Opinion
Editorials/Op-Ed
Readers' Opinions


Features
Arts
Books
Movies
Travel
Dining & Wine
Home & Garden
Fashion & Style
Crossword/Games
Cartoons
Magazine
Week in Review
Multimedia
College
Learning Network
Services
Archive
Classifieds
Book a Trip
Personals
Theater Tickets
Premium Products
NYT Store
NYT Mobile
E-Cards & More
About NYTDigital
Jobs at NYTDigital
Online Media Kit
Our Advertisers
Member_Center
Your Profile
E-Mail Preferences
News Tracker
Premium Account
Site Help
Privacy Policy
Newspaper
Home Delivery
Customer Service
Electronic Edition
Media Kit
Community Affairs
Text Version
TipsGo to Advanced Search
Search Options divide
go to Member Center Log Out
  

 [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 (10015 previous messages)

rshow55 - 10:34pm Mar 15, 2003 EST (# 10016 of 10027) Delete Message
Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES. Click "rshow55" for some things Lchic and I have done and worked for on this thread.

almarst2003 - 09:00pm Mar 13, 2003 EST (# 9903 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.v0LPasDF5Qs.2115032@.f28e622/11447 speaks of key issues:

" Control of Oil and impact on a World wide economy, Iraqi's geo-strategic and demographic potential, credibility of Bush and his Administration, future of Blair's Administration, future of UN, NATO and international law, relationship between US, Britain and "old"-Europe+Russia, degree of antiAmerican anti-Western radicalization of Arab and Muslim nations (1,5 bn in total as I think), Israeli-Palestinian conflict resolution."

All vitally important - big scale issues.

The physical existence of Saddam (or a hidden fraud-conspiracy) is also important - at a smaller scale level - because it is relevant to interpreting what has happened - what opportunities are - what risks are - and how Iraq can be expected to respond to statements and actions.

out.

rshow55 - 10:44pm Mar 15, 2003 EST (# 10017 of 10027) Delete Message
Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES. Click "rshow55" for some things Lchic and I have done and worked for on this thread.

Almarst , until leaders with real power - use - that power to see to it that key facts get checked to closure - there's no way to deal with some absolutely key problems. Since I've been begging for that on this board for almost three years now, without success, it may be too much to hope for (though sometimes ideas eventually do take hold.)

For certain kinds of power to be challenged - facts have to be established persuasively. These references include my personal favorite limerick - and important insights from almarst .

http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md2000s/md2547.htm

http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md3000s/md3869.htm

http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md11000s/md11902.htm

When things are complicated, truth is our only hope: http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7a163/296

gisterme - 10:46pm Mar 15, 2003 EST (# 10018 of 10027)

rshow55 - 10:24pm Mar 15, 2003 EST (# 10014 of ...) http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.v0LPasDF5Qs.2115032@.f28e622/11559

"...I have to assume from 10007 that gisterme probably assumes that Saddam is dead - as I think most people will who look at it..."

I assume no such thing. As cleary said in the post you referenced, I'm certain that Saddam is alive and up to his usual cruelty and deception. Nobody that doesn't have their head stuck firmly in the sand (or someplace worse) could reach any other conclusion from this post:

gisterme - 06:33pm Mar 15, 2003 EST (# 10007 of ...)

http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.v0LPasDF5Qs.2115032@.f28e622/11559 .

Quit trying to overcomplecate the obvious, Robert, and especially don't try to put words in my mouth. I'm quite able to speak for myself, thank you.

If you think Saddam is dead, well good for you. So far as I know, you're the only person on the planet that thinks so. You have a right to your opinion and a right to express it; but just because you think and say a thing doesn't make it so.

I'll believe Saddam is dead when I see his head on a stick. Frankly, I think he's too much of a coward to let that happen. He'll probably run for the Hague before he lets himself get the Mussolini treatment at the hands of his own people...if he has any choice in the matter. Whatever happens, Saddam will likely be found cowering under the table.

rshow55 - 10:48pm Mar 15, 2003 EST (# 10019 of 10027) Delete Message
Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES. Click "rshow55" for some things Lchic and I have done and worked for on this thread.

You should be ashamed of yourself. And you should check your facts.

If you were working to do everything possible to alienate the bulk of the world from the United States - you could hardly do a more effective job.

I think Krugman's got your number.

More Messages Recent Messages (8 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  / Missile Defense





Home | Forums FAQ | Back to Readers' Opinions Back to Top


Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company | Privacy Policy | Contact Us