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 (10857 previous messages)

almarst2003 - 10:41pm Mar 31, 2003 EST (# 10858 of 10879)

Row over secret plan for post-war Iraq - http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,927055,00.html

A disagreement has broken out within the Bush administration over a new government that the US is secretly planning in Kuwait to rule Iraq.

Under the plan, the government will consist of 23 ministries, each headed by an American. Every ministry will also have four Iraqi advisers appointed by the Americans, the Guardian has learned.

The government will take over Iraq city by city. Areas declared "liberated" by General Tommy Franks will be transferred to the temporary government under the overall control of Jay Garner, the for mer US general appointed to head a military occupation of Iraq.

In anticipation of the Baghdad regime's fall, members of this interim government have begun arriving in Kuwait.

Decisions on the government's composition appear to be entirely in US hands, particularly those of Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy secretary of defence. This has annoyed Gen Garner, who is officially in charge but who, according to sources close to the planning of the government, has had to accept the inclusion of a number of controversial Iraqis in advisory roles.

The most controversial of Mr Wolfowitz's proposed appointees is Ahmed Chalabi, the head of the opposition Iraqi National Congress, together with his close associates, including his nephew.

During his years in exile, Mr Chalabi has cultivated links with Congress to raise funds, and has become the Pentagon's darling among the Iraqi opposition. The defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, is one of his strongest supporters.

The state department and CIA, on the other hand, regard him with deep suspicion.

Mr Chalabi had envisaged becoming prime minister in an interim government, and is disappointed that no such post is included in the US plan. Instead, the former banker will be offered an advisory job at the finance ministry.

A senior INC official said last night that Mr Chalabi would not countenance a purely advisory position. The official added: "It is certainly not the INC's intention to advise any US ministers in Iraq. Our position is that no Americans should run Iraqi ministries. The US is talking about an interim Iraqi authority taking over, but we are calling for a provisional government."

The revelation about direct rule is likely to cause intense political discomfort for Tony Blair, who has been pressing for UN and international involvement in Iraq's reconstruction to overcome opposition in Britain as well as heal divisions across Europe.

The Foreign Office said last night that a "relatively fluid" number of British officials had been seconded to the planning team.

Last week Colin Powell, the US secretary of state, told Congress that immediately after the fall of President Saddam's regime, the US military would take control of the Iraqi government.

His only concession was that this would be done with the "full understanding" of the international community and with "the UN presence in the form of a UN special coordinator".

By imposing Mr Chalabi and his clique on the official administration-in-waiting, Mr Wolfowitz seems to be trying to appease the INC leader, even at the risk of annoying Gen Garner and those in Washington who consider him unsuitable for a senior post.

Mr Chalabi is former chairman of the Petra Bank in Jordan which collapsed, bringing ruin to many of its depositors. He was eventually convicted of fraud in his absence by a Jordanian court, though he maintains he is innocent.

Mr Chalabi has not lived in Iraq since 1956, apart from a short period organising resistance in the Kurdish north in the 1990s, and is thought to have little support inside Iraq.

EXPERIENCE DOES MATTER. THE PENTAGON SHOULD LISTEN TO BRITS HOW TO SET UP A COLONIAL RULE! NO IF OR BUTS!

almarst2003 - 10:42pm Mar 31, 2003 EST (# 10859 of 10879)

British military critical of US troops' heavy-handed style with civilians. - http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,926957,00.html

WHAT'S WRONG? NO FLOWERS - NO SMILES!

almarst2003 - 10:49pm Mar 31, 2003 EST (# 10860 of 10879)

It will end in disaster - http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,926820,00.html

The US and British governments have dragged us into a mess that will last for years - George Monbiot, Tuesday April 1, 2003

OH NO... ANOTHER PESSIMIST?

almarst2003 - 10:55pm Mar 31, 2003 EST (# 10861 of 10879)

The future of the International Space Station is in doubt due to an American refusal to fund Russia's contribution because of Moscow's continuing assistance to the nuclear programme of Iran, labelled by the US as an "axis of evil" state. - http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,927089,00.html

More Messages Recent Messages (18 following messages)

 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