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.

almarst2003 - 10:21pm Mar 16, 2003 EST (# 10097 of 10104)

The Euro? Or oil? No, the Euro, and oil. http://english.pravda.ru/world/2003/03/17/44475.html

Hang on, I thought it was an imperialistic plan by the Americans to take over the resources of the Middle East as a first step towards controlling the vast mineral wealth of Central Asia and later, Siberia, with a few hangers-on and sycophants like Blair, Aznar and every other day, Portugal’s José Barroso, when he isn’t saying that he wants peace really.

Well, that’s the simplistic view but things are far more complex than that. You see, George Bush knows that his economy is much nearer to meltdown than many believe. You won’t read anything about this in the international press, by the way, because it’s a kind of secret.

What is? Quite how drastic the situation is. The US economy is living on the knife-edge with a public deficit of trillions of dollars. Were the USD to enter into free-fall, the USA and the countries whose economies it controls, which are all based wholly upon an artificially-inflated USD based 100% on the oil industry, the Argentinean crisis would look like a joke. The USA and Latin America, would be bankrupt within a few days.

Sounds like financial Armageddon to me. That is not over-stating the case.

But what’s the connection with Saddam Hussein? I mean, what you’re saying has nothing to do with terrorism. Slow down. You’ve been listening to too many biased news stories from slanted western sources. Saddam Hussein has nothing to do with terrorism. As a matter of fact, Osama bin Laden hates him and considers him a “socialist and an infidel”. However, George Bush has to present a case and he can’t go public saying that the US economy is on the brink of a collapse.

Why not? At least it would be honest. It would be very stupid. The economy is based upon trust and anyway, if he started saying that the FRB was panicking, nobody would know what he was talking about.

The FRB? The Federal Reserve Bank. OK I’ll explain. Put in a nutshell, Iraq started the crisis in November 2000.

Hang on, wasn’t it in 1990 when they invaded Kuwait? Let’s keep focused on the real issues, not the pretexts and side-issues. In November 2000, Iraq adopted the Euro as the means of payment for its oil exports when the Euro was valued at 0.80 USD, side-stepping the flak when the USD devalued. The instability in the Gulf States is rising and Washington fears that if all the OPEC countries adopt the Euro instead of the USD for their oil exports, then the countries that buy oil will sell off the USD holdings in their central banks and buy Euros to make the transactions.

What does that mean? Basically, it means that the USD will devalue by up to 40%, according to some analysts, which would spell a global meltdown and bankrupt the United States of America, along with all the countries whose economies are controlled by the IMF, dependent on the USA and on oil imports.

So why Iraq? Well, Iraq is the only country in the region over which Washington does not have any influence. With the instability in the other Gulf States, Washington fears that only if it acts quickly, making itself a stakeholder in the region, controlling Iraq’s 10.7% of world oil reserves directly and then spreading its tentacles through the other countries in the region, some of which are already dominated, it will be able to keep OPEC under control and keep the USD artificially inflated, saving the US economy.

But what’s all this about the regime? Isn’t it about Saddam being a tyrant? Well that’s a long story. Saddam Hussein was once on friendly terms with Donald Rumsfeld, despite the fact that he swears blindly that they never met. However, the camera does not lie. The CIA were there too, around the time the Iranian army was gassed as they were threatening to break through, sweep through Baghdad and on into the Gulf.

But didn’t he gas the Kurds? Well, the British gassed the Kurds

lchic - 10:34pm Mar 16, 2003 EST (# 10098 of 10104)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Where is

What is

T R U T H ?

When Showalter says there should be TRUTH --- one has to agree with him --- there should be ONE version of events not a thousand ....

Showalter advocates an engineering court of truth -- what is technologically viable, what a fabrication? So too courts of truth to get to fact in the international ares seems necessary.

So WHAT is THIS war ABOUT ?????????????????????

I still believe that Saddam should get out of Iraq --- he can say 'he did it to save the country!'

______________________

Will the USA be taking in ALL the casualties and refugees?

lchic - 10:49pm Mar 16, 2003 EST (# 10099 of 10104)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Calm but alert

http://www.dougcomeau.com/wildlife/alert.html

lchic - 10:58pm Mar 16, 2003 EST (# 10100 of 10104)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

blueprint

http://www.sundayherald.com/27735

almarst2003 - 11:26pm Mar 16, 2003 EST (# 10101 of 10104)

Next week - Second phase: From Blueprint to Prototype...

(3 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense