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.

bbbuck - 10:41am Mar 30, 2003 EST (# 10772 of 10779)

This is a forum for 'Military Defense' not(or shouldn't be) a dumping ground for your personal position.

That's what the 'bush forum' is for.

For 'post bombing' your opinion 30 times a day at 700 words a post. At the 'bush forum' not here.

If you ever start posting here one or 2 or even 3 posts a day, I may consider reading them and then may give you my reasoned opinion of your opinion.

As long as you stay in this 30 'post bombs' a day, I will continue to ignore the content of your posts.

You have written some intriguing things concerning Russia and your claim to having lived there would or could prove interesting, as I have read many books on Russia.

But with your current posting mode, I would say, reasonable dialogue would be difficult.

lchic - 10:50am Mar 30, 2003 EST (# 10773 of 10779)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

... The Art of Thread Warfare ....

lchic - 10:53am Mar 30, 2003 EST (# 10774 of 10779)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

The bomb in the market place

the radio version runs

'the market place issue related to the 'backfire' of Iraqi anti-aircraft guns'

'prior to allowing Journalist onto the site - every piece of metal was collected'

------

If this is so then FISK is wrong

If it is not so then FISK is right

lchic - 10:55am Mar 30, 2003 EST (# 10775 of 10779)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

FISK

http://argument.independent.co.uk/commentators/story.jsp?story=392161

"" The Americans and British were doing their best yesterday to suggest that an Iraqi anti-aircraft missile destroyed those dozens of lives, adding that they were "still investigating" the carnage. But the coding is in Western style, not in Arabic. And many of the survivors heard the plane.

In the Al-Noor hospital yesterday morning, there were appalling scenes of pain and suffering .....

almarst2003 - 10:58am Mar 30, 2003 EST (# 10776 of 10779)

"But with your current posting mode, I would say, reasonable dialogue would be difficult."

I don't recall you ever tried.

rshow55 - 11:00am Mar 30, 2003 EST (# 10777 of 10779)
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.

There have to be better restraints on the right to lie.

Almarst, I have a question. That question is, realistically, dealing with Bush administration as it is, the media as it is, the world as it is - what, step by step - would you want to happen? bThat could POSSIBLY happen?

I feel I know. And sometimes, I have glimmerings that you know. But often - what I percieve is frustration - some of it very justified - but not a coherence that I can understand as workable.

My most basic push is for checking. Enough is straight, from here, that it seems to me that checking to closure, with discipline, is all we' d need to do much better than we're doing.

9881 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.BpQNaBmT6Xh.2326444@.f28e622/11425

9883 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.BpQNaBmT6Xh.2326444@.f28e622/11427

There's no solution unless facts get checked. Currently, nations seem prepared to expend tens of billions to engage in fights that look avoidable - kill tens or hundreds of thousands of people - displace millions, and anger hundreds of millions - - but whenever there is any whiff of a reason not to - nations see to it that key facts can't be checked, - even if it could be done for tiny amounts of effort. Strange. But entirely consistent with the Treaty of Westphalia.

For the checking that's needed, some power is going to have to be used - and it can't be done within the format of this board - which can be no more than "pretrial discovery."

We have systems of ideas that are muddled - including some of the Bush administration - including some in the Islamic world - including others.

But the really dangerous ones couldn't survive checking to closure.

(2 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense