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 (10423 previous messages)

rshow55 - 11:07am Mar 24, 2003 EST (# 10424 of 10428) 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.

Last time I looked, the stock markets were way down - over 3 % in not much more than an hour.

That's stupid. What did people reasonably expect?

It looks to me like things are going pretty well - but on the other hand, I expected that in a military situation such as this, some thousands of American soldiers were likely to be wounded, and very many were likely to die.

Sometimes the coverage in the NYT is so distinguished that it revives my sometimes-wavering confidence in Bill Casey's judgement and advice on a key issue. The coverage of the war, so far, has been very impressive - and, if biased - not more biased than must be expected under current journalistic conditions.

I think the following coverage on market instability is also really distinguished, and that people need to remember how important it is that people judge well.

We need more stability - fewer "wild rides" such as described in July 2002

Week in Review: Hold On for a Wild Ride http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/21/weekinreview/21BERE.html

Think about how big a 2.5% change in valuation is.

INTERACTIVE GRAPHIC The Incredible Shrinking Stock Market More Than $7 Trillion Gone By SETH W. FEASTER http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/21/weekinreview/20020721_MARKET_GRAPHIC.html

"What follows are various ways of looking at the market's continuing contraction. Here's a beautiful technique -- graphs under graphs:

Click on the graph in Feaster's graphic, and there are more wonderful, enlightening graphs:

Market Value: 17.25 Trillion - March 24, 2000 http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/weekinreview/20020721_MARKET/nwr_MARKET_01.html

. Market Value: 10.03 Trillion - July 18, 2002

. Market Structure:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

FRANK RICH is right in The Road to Perdition http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/20/opinion/20FRIC.html . . . "Everything is connected."

When Bill Casey advised me that, after easier options were exhausted, my best chance was to "come in through The New York Times - - he had good reasons. When exposition is difficult, and depth is needed - it is the best newspaper in the world. Surely the best in the U.S. Though not, perhaps, as good as Casey thought in every respect.

The Times can't and won't break a story that is too difficult all alone -- and for pretty good reasons. But some situations are unstable - maybe even ready to "break" -- and break into print.

- - -

The idea that, when a few tens of Americans get killed in a war we started, the market valuation of stocks dives 300 billion dollars worth is stupid. People need more stability than that - in the US , and all over the world. We need to lie less - when it matters. For all sorts of reasons of life and death - and dollars and sense.

- - -

For what little it may be worth - I think things are going well, and that a good deal of disciplined optimism is called for. Mixed with some seriousness - there are problems before us that we can solve.

almarst2003 - 11:57am Mar 24, 2003 EST (# 10425 of 10428)

FBI, Justice Dept. Increase Use of Wiretaps, Records Searches - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A16287-2003Mar23.html

Expectations...

The war against terror and simultanious establishement of American Century by military force will take more and cost more then some have expected. As I see it - the gradually steeper perpetual down sloop. "The Road to Perdition"

If the truth is a first casualty of WAR, we may not see it again for a very long time.

BTW. I think the "liberties" will just follow.

More Messages Recent Messages (3 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

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





Home | Back to Readers' Opinions Back to Top


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