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.

commondata - 10:34am Mar 28, 2003 EST (# 10626 of 10636)

Jorian,

You claimed yesterday that Mr. Hussein has been responsible for the deaths of one and a half million of his own people. Did that number fall from Dubya's backside and into your mouth? It is true that a million or so people across both sides were killed in the Iran-Iraq war, a war against the Islamists and backed by the US. This was the same US that helped Mr. Hussein with his chemical weapons laboratories and knew indifferently of the gassing of Kurds. It didn't matter to them how one Arab killed another - high level CIA correspondence makes that thinking clear.

So this is a war for liberty and freedom, and a Christian God and righteousness are on your side? Is this a principle that you will apply equitably across the globe? Or only in a country with the second greatest oil production capacity and probably the greatest reserves? And only in a country that you can disarm by threat of bombing before you actually bomb? What about the freedom to have clean water and the freedom from disease? These are the world's biggest killers. How much more freedom $75 billion could have bought. Maybe you're not so righteous after all; you're either dishonest or stupid. Actually, I'm inclined to believe that you're a lot of both.

The young American and British soldiers who die will have died fighting for colonial resource vultures in an aggressive and illegal war. The Iraqi soldiers will have died defending their home and Iraqi civilians will have died for just being in their home. When New York and London are hit you will know who to blame. The planet will breath easier when Blair and Bush are shackled and imprisoned.

commondata - 10:35am Mar 28, 2003 EST (# 10627 of 10636)

The score so far: between 253 and 333 innocent Muslims cold-bloodedly murdered by Zionist crusaders. Bin Laden wins.

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

Never mind though rshow, that's low by historic standards and you've got to get these things in their proper perspective, eh? I'll bet you can see a hopeful sign change glimmering in the distance.

jorian319 - 10:44am Mar 28, 2003 EST (# 10628 of 10636)

Alarmst - thank you for boldly clarifying your position. I doubt that many - if any here would say that they are against the things you (believably) say you stand for.

The means to those ends are in question, as is the forthrightness of the US administration. I may decry the invocation of war to "solve" the problems of the Iraqi people, but the realities of US interests, Saddam's history of brutality, the global climate of terrorism and other factors combine to make me think our current course may be the best available option - for now. I fear for the aftermath, where I can see our own freedoms eroded to non-existence in the name of security. In fact, the average Iraqi will surely benefit as the average American suffers.

It is disappointing that it came to this. IMHO, we could have - should have - taken this regime down through covert means a long time ago. And the same goes for all the other brutal oppressers we can identify. Screw international convention/politeness/tolerance of despots.

rshow55 - 10:48am Mar 28, 2003 EST (# 10629 of 10636)
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.

commondata - 10:35am Mar 28, 2003 EST (# 10627

In fact, quite a number of hopeful things. At least if people keep their heads. I don't think rage helps a lot, commondata .

I'm sorry the war is happening, and I think Bush made some mistakes in judgement getting in it, and I've said so. But I don't share your indigation. Certainly not for the same reasons.

Commondata, what do you want to actually happen that is possible and stable in the world as it happens to be - not just as you'd like it to be?

Bush does have some problems he has to deal with - and is expected to.

commondata - 11:05am Mar 28, 2003 EST (# 10630 of 10636)

Commondata, what do you want to actually happen that is possible and stable in the world as it happens to be - not just as you'd like it to be?

It's an incredibly simple idea, rshow. How about we stop killing innocent people who are no threat to us? How about we stop invading countries that are no threat to us? If the US believed that Iraq did pose a threat the international community was united behind helping the US prove that fact. It couldn't, though it could have had months and years more to try. It would have been possible to avoid the death and destruction given the world as it is. I'm no pacifist, rshow, and no idealist. I'd just like there to be a trial - then a judgement based on international law - and then, if necessary, the execution. This war will prove dangerously destabilising for decades to come and the people responsible for it are ciminals.

(6 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense