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 - 01:22pm Apr 17, 2002 EST (#1413 of 1422)

Almarst , I wish the MD thread prior to March of this year was still available -- a lot of what you said, a year ago, seems remarkably on target now.

lchic - 01:28pm Apr 17, 2002 EST (#1414 of 1422)
"They just started demolishing with the people inside" Jenin

The USA media aren't feeding out the fullest news, whereas elsewhere people have a free press and get a more balanced input.

on alliances - here - http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/14/weekinreview/14MARQ.html - this guy hasn't reasoned that nations are made up of their constituents. The leader of a nation (excepting the US) has to look to the view of that public.

Publics in general are not impressed with 'Bush and Terrorism'.

Terrorism wrt Palestine is a misnomer .. it's actually FREEDOM FIGHTING by the oppressed. The Palestinians total their losses at 20,000 ... that's ten times the number of USA folk lost to 9/11 ... _{(each of the dead represents a personal/family tragedy)}

Other peoples' tragedies being 'bigger and longer' than 9/11 aren't acknowledged, even though funded by, the US!

The writer would be correct to assume that an alliance is thought out policy .... whereas the whaco 'terrorism' charge is less sustainable ... especially when 'freedom fighters' are called 'terrorists' when technically they are not.

lchic - 01:30pm Apr 17, 2002 EST (#1415 of 1422)
"They just started demolishing with the people inside" Jenin

|>

almarst-2001 - 01:42pm Apr 17, 2002 EST (#1416 of 1422)

Without the shifting of funds, the government would have been technically in default on the debt – which has never happened in the country's history. - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1031-2002Apr17.html

It seems the current US administration course of single-handly move and rule the planet may hit a fiscal celling rather soon.

How many people have heard and understood the real imlications of the BIG-BOOM?

rshow55 - 01:47pm Apr 17, 2002 EST (#1417 of 1422)

People have to understand more clearly, more sympathetically, and more carefully, why and how it is that people and groups become willing to kill without mercy, and fight to the death.

Morality can be helpful, but can also obscure.

Is "murder of unknown, noncombattant members of an enemy population for strategic purposes" regrettable and reprehensible? Most would say so.

Is one form of it more regrettable or reprehensible than another - for like numbers of dead, in similar classifications?

If we agreed, for the purposes of discussion, that the answer to the question above is no - - a great deal would clarify.

Another question --

"Is killing where you risk your life worse if the risk of your own death is 100%? Worse from a moral point of view?

Why exactly?

almarst-2001 - 02:47pm Apr 17, 2002 EST (#1418 of 1422)

Is "murder of unknown, noncombattant members of an enemy population for strategic purposes" regrettable and reprehensible? Most would say so.

Not according to what we know about strategic bombing compains conducted by Britain and US during and after WWII.

It was never so easy as it is now to kill millions without leaving your char. Once the "enemy" is depicted as "inhumane" and you don't see the victims from 30000ft above.

"Is killing where you risk your life worse if the risk of your own death is 100%? Worse from a moral point of view?"

One does not have to be a great moralist to understand the difference between cold-blooded murder from a comfort of your char and ultimate act of desperation. Even if induced by someone who is not taking the actual risk.

almarst-2001 - 03:09pm Apr 17, 2002 EST (#1419 of 1422)

On Israel-Palestinian tragedy.

As a Jewish who lived and served in Israel, it is very hard for me to take a balanced stand.

Morover, I greatly despise the "jewish patriots" demonstrating on the streets of America and pushing for particular solutions they have no stake or risk in. This is ultimatly immoral.

The situation in the Israel is very difficalt to solve. That why it was so annoying and insulting for me to read some of the works of Thomas Friedman a year ago on the subject. One have to be totaly mindless and blind or pretend to be such, to produce such a journalistic garbage.

The Israel can't risk to have an antagonistic enemy state established along its borders so close to its major population centers. Figting for the scare water and land resources. Unforgiving the unsolved refugies problem. The very poor and underdeveloped state eying with envy the florishing Israel.

The Palestinians can't wait forever, while the problems above just become worst and worst with each new settlement on their territory. assuming the moral support of the wast majority of the World, except the US. The perfect time bomb.

The Israel can't solve the problem in a way the US or many "civilized" nations of the West could - using overhelming military force and total destruction and annihilation of large part of the population. I am pretty sure the US would not hesitate on doing just that. In doing so, the Jewish state will eliminate its legitimacy in its own eyes. Will end be a trully Jewish.

What is particularely appaling to me is the fact that so many prominent Jewish leaders in US and Europe supported the bombing of Serbia in asimilar circumstances. Even while Serbs tryed to defend their own native territory and population suffered so much from hands of NAZI Croats and Albanians in a recent past.

Could it overhelm even the GOD's patience with Jewish Establishement, Americans and Europeans?

(3 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense