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.

rshow55 - 04:46pm Mar 30, 2003 EST (# 10801 of 10805)
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.

2055: rshowalter 4/6/01 12:57pm

2056: rshowalter 4/6/01 12:58pm

2057: Russia, as a nation, and a government, needs to stop lying rshowalter 4/6/01 1:00pm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md2000s/md2048.htm

2058: suggestions http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md2000s/md2058.htm

rshowalter - 08:30am Apr 8, 2001 EST (#2089 of 2089) Robert Showalter http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md2000s/md2088_2089.htm

2058: suggestions inexpensive, logically incremental, workable rshowalter 4/6/01 1:04pm

Favorable response from NYT Forum monitor: armel7 4/6/01 1:17pm 2062 -- links re good press for Vladimir Putin in NYT rshowalter 4/6/01 1:19pm

http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md2000s/md2058.htm

I believe that Ted Turner should know that Putin, or someone in his staff, is thinking of these ideas. Putin is, within his limits, making an effort to advance Russian, and make her a more free society -- on a pattern that can work for his country, from where it actually is.

Thank you,

Bob

M. Robert Showalter

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

a personal request (tangential here) rshowalter 4/6/01 1:30pm

For background on me, and my main interests, you could if you wished read the extensively linked rshowalter 4/6/01 1:42pm rshowalter 4/6/01 1:43pm rshowalter 4/6/01 1:43pm rshowalter 4/6/01 1:44pm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md2000s/md2064.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md2000s/md2066.htm

REASONS FOR CONCERN ABOUT US PRESS BIAS CONTINUE, AND CONCERNS HAVE SHARPENED SINCE THIS EXCHANGE.

Here are more references to a subject of deep concern to the whole world - a nation misinformed by a "culture of lying."

670 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.RrXTaoPW6q6.2389624@.f28e622/830

1101-1102 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.RrXTaoPW6q6.2389624@.f28e622/1402

1981 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.RrXTaoPW6q6.2389624@.f28e622/2465

2959 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.RrXTaoPW6q6.2389624@.f28e622/3696

3847 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.RrXTaoPW6q6.2389624@.f28e622/4846

5656 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.RrXTaoPW6q6.2389624@.f28e622/7060

From Weaver's Dust Cover 5943-44 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.RrXTaoPW6q6.2389624@.f28e622/7390

8716 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.RrXTaoPW6q6.2389624@.f28e622/10242

9079 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.RrXTaoPW6q6.2389624@.f28e622/10605

10197 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.RrXTaoPW6q6.2389624@.f28e622/11743

jorian319 - 05:42pm Mar 30, 2003 EST (# 10802 of 10805)

TOO MUCH OF A "GOOD" THING?

We are effecting discourse.

Says Rshow.

Unfortunately that discourse consists of three people (assuming no sockpuppets), whos posts comprise over 90% of this forum.

I doubt if one lurker a month reads more than one post total, after clicking on "missile defense" and seeing not a word about it, just a running sermon by Rshowalarmstchick. Most of Rshow's posts consist of epic lists of links to other Rshow posts and Rshow's site - sheesh! Effecting discourse? If you think so, I think it's effecting YOU. Which of course, is to be applauded.

almarst2003 - 06:18pm Mar 30, 2003 EST (# 10803 of 10805)

Its also a telling sign the MD forum is actively attended by less then half a dosen participants.

I don't think NYT had a technical issues related to MD to be a center for discussion. People with any actual knowlege would not share it here in open. And those without, would look ridicules.

So, the forum have had to be about geo-political implications of unilateral break of ABM treaty. The cost in $, political, moral and ethical implications.

In some way, we didn't deviate that far from those issues.

Still, the questions remain:

- Why so fiew participants?

- Why, if so fiew participants, NYT does not close it?

- Why, if its so obvious to some that forum is out in waco, the moderator does not step in?

BTW.

I forgot couple more nodes in a cycle which should be as follows -

EXCESSIVE POWER-ARROGANCE-IGNORANCE-FATAL MISCALCULATION-DEMISE OF POWER

(2 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense