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 (10521 previous messages)

rshow55 - 08:56am Mar 26, 2003 EST (# 10522 of 10527) 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.

We need less bulls*it - a sense of reality - a sense of the past that is true. The words of Ruby Tuesday by the Rolling Stones work for me here. We're going wrong because we aren't straight about our past - or even willing to talk about it. http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md01000s/md1224_1230.htm

If people don't understand what a terrible box I've been in since AEA failed, think about the words of Ruby Tuesday http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md01000s/md1224_1230.htm (I liked the flip side, too.)

The Russians need a past, so that they can construct a workable future. So do we. People all over the world have the same needs. And for all sorts of entirely practical reasons, and deep emotional reasons, it is important that our past be true in the ways that matter when we have to refer to it for action, or for consideration of related things.

If we got just a few things straight - the horrors we're facing - the terrible dangers we're facing - could be resolved.

I need help, to do any more than post on this board.

lchic - 08:57am Mar 26, 2003 EST (# 10523 of 10527)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Colin Powell

spoke of MORALITY

wrt the people of Iraq moving out

from under a dictatorship

Powell, one concludes(?), is for changes in International Law that have concern for the human within the inhuman State.

rshow55 - 09:02am Mar 26, 2003 EST (# 10524 of 10527) 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 - 10521 has a great citation

Bin Ladden to USA - "I Want YOU To Invade Iraq" - http://www.tompaine.com/op_ads/opad.cfm/ID/7434

    "Go ahead. Saddam will quickly fall, but that won’t make the world safer or more secure. . . .
If we did the things required to make order possible (including logical order) we could make the world safer and more secure. Not just for ourselves.

Blair, from where he is now, could set that up if some other leaders backed him - and if he asked other leaders to be as forthright (flaws and all) as he is himself.

Some key patterns repeat, again and again and again. In our logic, in our brains, and in the world.

I started the year on the Missile Defense board with this: (# 7177 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.S5Z7aet75T8.1557756@.f28e622/8700

    "I think this is a year where some lessons are going to have to be learned about stability and function of international systems, in terms of basic requirements of order , symmetry , and harmony - at the levels that make sense - and learned clearly and explicitly enough to produce systems that have these properties by design, not by chance.
I think there's a good deal to hope for. This, I think, is clear. Order is necessary. Symmettry and harmony as well. That means that we can do much better than the chaos and disconnection of the Treaty of Westphalia - and that it is important that we do so. We need to negotiate workable, just structures of international law into being. We don't have them now.

lchic - 09:03am Mar 26, 2003 EST (# 10525 of 10527)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Good that the Senate cut the 'tax-back' for the rich .... who can most afford to assist in help pay for this war.

There'll be a tax-levy soon!

lchic - 09:07am Mar 26, 2003 EST (# 10526 of 10527)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

'we don't have them now'

No - that's why there is so much confusion ... people out on the streets marching have a gut-feeling that WAR is WRONG ... they now see 'others' .... those killed and maimed, as people. People just like themselves!

    Remember the Kidnapped person ... the longer s/he is with the captor, the more likely it is that the captor sees the person - as just that - A PERSON. A valued person -- not to be trashed!

More Messages Recent Messages (1 following message)

 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