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 - 10:34am Apr 23, 2002 EST (#1704 of 1712)

There are many technical problems for the global village to adress - for people to address. Some of the barriers to addressing them are getting less. The tactics for frustrating closure about facts, and reasonable actions -- those tactics are getting clearer and much harder to disguise.

I think the world is a considerably safer place than it was, even just a year ago, because people are looking at these sort of problems. There is a much broader consensus, among more people in more nations -- about what the problems are.

A key problem, again and again and again and again, is that people can't make good decisions - can't take actions that work -- without clear information, available, understood, and trustworthy (checkable) -- to work from.

But that ONE key problem can be adressed - in general, the things needed for checking, for clear communication to closure, are getting clear - the problems of information flow and communication are only as hard as they are. Get those problems better solved -- and permanent improvements in the human condition are possible -- if only patterns of checking , now technically feasible, become more widespread - and get some force behind them.

The MD boondoggle would be fine place to start, because the technical facts are so clear - and if tthat effort, described here, were well backed, could demonstrate almost all of the basic patterns needed to fix a lot of problems.

A key question - that illuminates some others, is this.

" When large news organizations such as The New York Times cannot solve problems by covering the facts about them -- why don't the solutions happen, when they often seem very clear?

If people could answer that question in detail, with balance -- a lot that is ugly now would clean up - in ways that both almarst and most literate people, all over the world, would approve of.

almarst-2001 - 10:48am Apr 23, 2002 EST (#1705 of 1712)

'Star Wars' could turn space into a wasteland - http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/04/22/orbit.debris/index.html

rshow55 - 11:35am Apr 23, 2002 EST (#1706 of 1712)

http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/04/22/orbit.debris/index.html

To destroy space as a location for either peaceful or warlike purposes -- launch ball bearings, or even gravel.

Countermeasures are easy , defenses are hard - - and unforseen consequences have to be expected in complicated circumstances. Especially complicated adversarial circumstances.

We need to learn to make peace.

Not abolish conflict, or all killing - that can't be done -- but make ridiculous conflicts, based on mistakes, lies, and muddles -- much less likely. We'd all be far safer.

Getting a good look at "Star Wars" would show a great deal about the whole "military-industrial-political" complex, and show in detail the reasons why Eisenhower warned us in FAREWELL ADDRESS of January 17, 1961 http://www.geocities.com/~newgeneration/ikefw.htm .

The things Eisenhower warned about have happened - and those problems have gone unrestrained a very long time. We have some things to fix.

mazza9 - 11:57am Apr 23, 2002 EST (#1707 of 1712)
Louis Mazza

Amarst-2001:

I don't differentiate regarding abuse. I just watched a 50s costume drama entitled "The Egyptian". Its based on the life of the pharoh Aknahton. The religious intolerance, the haves and have nots were evident then and are still evident today!

Maybe you should read today's Op Ed by Kristoff, (name probably derived form the name Christ!!). It chronicles a circumstance that exists today which has existed since the time of Aknahton and even before. Ask yourself, why has this circumstance received little notice from the UN when this is a MAJOR violation of the UN Charter. lchic: Yes it's horrible what's happening in Israel and "Palestine" but you haven't mentioned Sudan.

Slavery in 2002!!!

I don't know is B-52s would help the slaves but it sure might get the slaveholders attention!

LouMazza

almarst-2001 - 01:04pm Apr 23, 2002 EST (#1708 of 1712)

Louis,

Why go so far as Sudan when you can find as many enslaved people (mostly young women sold/forced into prostitution) in Europe and US?

"I don't differentiate regarding abuse."

I wonder what do you call "abuse".

Does it include "humanitarian" bombing" and "colateral damage"? Or establishment and support of pretty bloody military dictatorships? Or carpet bombing and Agent Orange in places in Indo-China? Or destruction of civilian infrastructure and economic sunctions harting mostly the poor, the sick, the children?

mazza9 - 01:26pm Apr 23, 2002 EST (#1709 of 1712)
Louis Mazza

Almarst:

You appear incapable of differentiating between Sudanese Slavery and "enslavement" in the US and Europe. It's not the same and if you think that the 6 year old mentioned in Kristoff's article has an equivalent counterpart in the US then name it or shut up. I'm tired of your moral equivalency nonsense. You enslave me with you ignorance, when you mouth such pernicious garbage.

If you can't see the difference then shame on you.

LouMazza

almarst-2001 - 02:48pm Apr 23, 2002 EST (#1710 of 1712)

Louis, While we are at Sudan,

How the destruction of the only pharmaceudical factory affected the people. Particluarely the poor, the children, the old and the sick? how many died and suffered as result of this "mistake" the US did not even apologised, not talking about compensation and rebuilding.

A moral relativism?

(2 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense