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 - 03:20pm Mar 24, 2003 EST (# 10431 of 10433)

City of rage - As missiles fall on Baghdad, anger against Americans is rising - http://www.msnbc.com/news/889982.asp?0cv=CB10

Bush to Iraqi people: "All we ask is LOVE, LOVE, LOVE..."

lchic - 03:26pm Mar 24, 2003 EST (# 10432 of 10433)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

On stock market - the word was - that the US market was $7trillion overvalued a decade ago ... before it peaked skyward.

The value-movements reflect 'long term optimism/fatalism' or rationalism ...

At 'each' hour of the day ---- which way?

Mulgabe is 'busy' abusing civil rights, abusing people -- while no-one is looking

___________

Is the Chinese government focusing their national-eye on MEast ... & commenting ....

It moves the political action 'off shore' ... when there may be matters on home turf that abuse rights

____________

On Iraq - a strategist who 'walked in the shoes of Saddam' would have seen that the current strategy ... putting the war in the civilian-nest - with time and casualty consequences - was the way it would be played

Anyone got the statistics on the '91 Iraqi war' ... 100,000 Iraqi troups killed ... yet ... it's taken a decade to be exposed ...

_____________

Saddam-H and R-Mulgabe --- parallels

both failed to represent their people

failed their people

'hung-on' rather than 'walked'

Knowing when to 'walk', when 'to let go' ... pity that's not 'taught' more widely and understood!

almarst2003 - 03:27pm Mar 24, 2003 EST (# 10433 of 10433)

Defense hawks want to set up an interim authority quickly, giving a dominant or key role to exiles, especially Chalabi’s group, the Iraqi National Congress. The State Department, which is less concerned with Rumsfeldian efficiency than with creating a regime that has international legitimacy, would prefer to wait for a Baghdad conference planned for four to six weeks after the war ends. That would make the advent of “Iraqi democracy” more inclusive, bringing in some 60 Iraqi exiles picked at a recent London conference along with as many as 180 delegates selected internally from Iraq’s 18 provinces. But the Defense [Dep] hawks “want the Baghdad conference to basically rubber-stamp” a Chalabi-dominated interim government, says a Capitol Hill official privy to the debate. http://www.msnbc.com/news/889543.asp?0cv=CB10

They should learn our $ bills carefully. There nowere is anything about "democracy". "IN $$$$$$$ WE TRUST"

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense