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 - 06:45pm Apr 10, 2002 EST (#1240 of 1243)

Now, I wouldn't want to be even slightly underhanded about this, nor discuss any classified information at all.

To repeat:

" if I put on a suit, shined my shoes, and walked into the State Department - asking for permission to see some people -- what do you think might happen?

" I'd like to make a pitch to the Russian Embassy, and some other places, as well.

I'd want to ask the Russians and others for support in getting the questions above checked. and discuss one or perhaps two ideas for a movie.

I wouldn't have to, or want to, discuss any classified information at all. There would be no need to do so.

A federal employee could come right along with me - - I'd be glad for the company. It would be better still, if a federal employee, from CIA or any other agency, and a witness connected with a newspaper came along, with recording devices if they wished to use them.

There are some other things I'd like to discuss. I haven't contacted Theodore Postol, though I would like to, and have some reasons to. I'd be more comfortable doing so after discussing some things with the government -- with somebody outside the government, with credibility, knowing that I was doing so.

Last year, and before March of this year, gisterme and I had a great deal of dialog about getting things checked in terms of the open literature. In the course of that discussion - - gisterme said that I was committing "treason" many times (estimating and sampling from a search I just did.) But eventually gisterme backed off. Thing could be discussed in terms of what was in the open literature.

I've never suggested breaking any security rules at all - and don't believe I have.

Gisterme , can you come up with a single example of anything I've said, specifically about the technology of missile defense, that has been wrong? (If you check, you can find one example when I was wrong - but I quickly acknowledged my mistake.)

Gisterme , do you have any specific objections to anything set out in MD14 rshow55 3/1/02 7:07pm , which summarizes technical conclusions on this thread before March 2?

A key reason to want the technical answers about the current missile defense boondoggle is that those answers would move toward larger answers to questions the whole world needs, and is coming to know it needs:

What is the real national interest of the United States? Not just the interest of the military-industrial complex.

and

Can the United States be honest enough and trustworthy enough about what it asks for, and agrees to, so that its interests can be reasonably, efficiently, justly accomodated by the rest of the world?

Those are good questions, and I'm not alone in asking them.

lchic - 11:52pm Apr 10, 2002 EST (#1241 of 1243)

Midnight at the Oasis almost time to send your camel to bed -- but not yet!

I've found the one guy in the world who has complete understanding of the situation in greater Palestine - currently a Visiting Fellow at the Australian National University (ANU Canberra)- Dr Glen BARKLEY - who says the next move is Bush's.

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

But is seems that Bush hasn't made his mind up as to the what_where_ how to jump!

The Frankenstein of Israel is Americas own creation - a counter power to protect oil.
Didn't Alex say - OIL was KING!
So has Bush got the muscle to Stamp out this Frankenstein
before it bites the USA too hard in tender places?
With all the new alliances in the world - perhaps Frankenstein has served it's purpose and has become a rudundant concept completely out of step with the rest of the world.

- - - - - - - - - - -

According to Barkley and with reference to international law, Palestine is illegally occupied and without it's own military power. This being so, Palestine is perfectly within it's rights to use suicide bombers in Israel. These aren't terrorists - they're 'Freedom Fighters' - and doing that work.

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

Reading the Op-Ed I noticed, with respect to Colin Powell, this

.. he is now on a mission to stop Israel from winning the war of terror that was launched against it. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/11/opinion/11SAFI.html

Of course Powell should be out to 'stop' this war, it's a war in Palestine, set-up by Israel (who set up the 1967 war), to TAKE TAKE TAKE over more and more and more of Palestine.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _

Glen says an option open to Bush is to dump Israel (Sharon) and go with the Arabs!

Logic :
There are 'more' arabs and they have 'oil'!

Right on Glen !

-------------- Glen's professional-opinion hasn't made it here as yet.

^{E... errr .. Glen would that be Barkley or Berkley ?}

gisterme - 01:55am Apr 11, 2002 EST (#1242 of 1243)

lchic 4/10/02 11:52pm

"... E... errr .. Glen would that be Barkley or Berkley ?"

Thank you for adding a little balance to your statments, lchic.

(1 following message)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense