[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 (1263 previous messages)

rshow55 - 03:28pm Apr 11, 2002 EST (#1264 of 1278) Delete Message

Now, I've looked at the references in MD7136, and there are some click-throughs from those references that I've looked at as well. If gisterme or anybody else asks, I can post these. For the life of me, I can't see how any reasonably objective person, looking at these references, could object much to my statement that gisterme's work almost certainly shows consultation with colleagues. Nor can I myself see an example of anything gisterme posted for technical references that I didn't deal with carefully and correctly. Insofar as I can remember, and have been able to check, there wasn't a single technical point that gisterme made on the whole MD thread that I didn't consider - and respond to when there was anything of substance to respond to. If someone, willing to play the role of umpire, would like me to make that case in more detail -- I believe I could.

I was astonished when gisterme said in MD1243 rshow55 4/10/02 6:44pm that "I only want to check what is uncheckable."

I've wanted to check the checkable . MD1257 rshow55 4/11/02 7:34am today offers clear examples. .

I'll may be saying more about MD1243 gisterme 4/11/02 3:24am


For now, I find myself recalling the question about decency in Paul Krugman's At Long Last?

gisterme , you have, I believe, many of the worst characteristics, and many of the best characteristics, of a Stanford Provost I admire very much in some ways. Even so, with respect to MD1243 it seems to me that it is fair to ask sharply:

"Where is decency?"

Not in MD1243 gisterme 4/11/02 3:24am .

rshow55 - 04:13pm Apr 11, 2002 EST (#1265 of 1278) Delete Message

If gisterme can cite a single example, ever, where I've taken a position that was not intended to be in the real security interest of the United States -- I'd be interested.

I've always intended to act in the real interest of the United States, and I believe that I have.

Under the circumstances, it has been difficult and hazerdous duty, I believe. But given my circumstances, and the promises I have made, an obligation.

Defending the United States, and serving the interests of the United States is serious business -- that deserves more than enronation . - - Serving the United States, in the real world, requires right answers.

Not frauds, or muddles so serious that they are very hard to distinguish from frauds.

manjumicha2001 - 05:19pm Apr 11, 2002 EST (#1266 of 1278)

If I may add a it, I heard that another critical problem with the booster-phase laser interception are the rocket fumes that explode out of the boosting rocket and the fact that such fumes/gases spreading out fast make the targeting near impossible (even if no reflective counter-measures are not there). Of course this is the problem that gisterms of the world will face only after they get a functional laser weapon developed...which is not yet a feasible proposition due to the "limitations of of currently known physics" as RSHOW tried to explain.....:-) But what the heck, no rational thoughts would stop this political pork and the gisterms of this world at this point....we shoudl just think of the $300 billion to be spent for the next 5 years as a new welfare program for them and have soem peace fo mind about it, rshow.

manjumicha2001 - 05:27pm Apr 11, 2002 EST (#1267 of 1278)

Haven't you heard of the "faith-based" welfare program?

rshow55 - 07:57pm Apr 11, 2002 EST (#1268 of 1278) Delete Message

Especially after MD1234 rshow55 4/10/02 1:53pm , the NYT Missile Defense tread has been active. I made an "off the cuff" comment, and drew a distinguished poster, gisterme , in a very few minutes.

Here is the "off the cuff" comment.

Just musing -- 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.

What would happen? For me, that's a very practical questions. I need to be able to function.

MD899 rshow55 3/28/02 12:11pm . . . . Almarst , if you were a leader of Russia, or China, what would you ask the leader of America to do -- what would you want American voters to understand?

MD1001 rshow55 3/31/02 4:45pm

MD1228 rshow55 4/10/02 9:48am ... MD1229 rshow55 4/10/02 9:59am
MD1230 rshow55 4/10/02 11:28am ...

Saving the expense of "Star Wars" is important - but to me, it is still secondary. What is most important is that we learn to tell the truth, and find the truth, about questions of fact on which our welfare and survival depend.

More Messages Recent Messages (10 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Email to Sysop  Your Preferences

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  / Missile Defense

Home | Site Index | Site Search | Forums | Archives | Shopping

News | Business | International | National | New York Region | NYT Front Page | Obituaries | Politics | Quick News | Sports | Science | Technology/Internet | Weather
Editorial | Op-Ed

Features | Arts | Automobiles | Books | Cartoons | Crossword | Games | Job Market | Living | Magazine | Real Estate | Travel | Week in Review

Help/Feedback | Classifieds | Services | New York Today

Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company