![[F]](../_images/site.gif) New York Times on the Web Forums  Science
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.
 
  (1720 previous messages)
rshow55
- 08:13pm Apr 23, 2002 EST (#1721
of 1731) 
lchic
4/23/02 4:44pm On Kissinger:
Thomas L Friedman's review of Kissenger's Does America Need a
Foreign Policy http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/k/kissinger-01policy.html
...is titled How to Run the World in Seven Chapters http://www.nytimes.com/books/01/06/17/reviews/010617.17friedmt.html
Friedman's review includes this:
" What was said of ''The Prince,'' as
Harvey C. Mansfield Jr. of Harvard University explains in his
translation, will no doubt be said by critics of Kissinger.
Mansfield wrote: ''Soon after being published in 1532,''
Machiavelli's book ''was denounced as a collection of sinister
maxims and as a recommendation of tyranny, giving rise to the
hateful term 'Machiavellian.' '' Kissinger's book is not a
recommendation for tyranny in any way, but it is very
''Kissingerian'' -- focused more around power balances, stability
and national interests than American values. I have no doubt
that Kissinger is as cynical, mean and nasty a bureaucratic
infighter and player of the game of nations as his most venomous
critics have charged. At times, he can make Machiavelli sound like
one of the Sisters of Mercy. But having said that, one can
still value the clarity of his thinking, which is fully on display
here.
One can value that clarity, from one perspective, and find it
ugly indeed if you are almarst , or looking at things from
the perspective of many other countries.
It seems to me that, in nuclear policy, the Vietnam War, and much
else, the United States, behaving in "Kissingerian" fashion --
really was as ugly and blood-curdling as Friedman (and
almarst ) suggests.
The world is asking us to do better - insisting that we do
better.
We can do better.
lchic
- 09:10pm Apr 23, 2002 EST (#1722
of 1731)
"Washington's values are not my values .." Karen
HUGHES (Mine Neither!)
The movement of labour from LAND to FACTORY over a couple of
centuries was the 'pull' of higher wages in the industrial/factory
world.
Those countries feeling 'at the mercy' of incoming capital should
look to their strengths .. they have their domestic populations who
will start to buy the goods produced. A question to ask is
'What
is the SIZE of the home market (modified by ability to pay for
product)?'
Producing goods for which there is a home demand is
worth considering.
Knowledge of potential export demands for
same goods - would be worth knowing.
A country that has educated and experienced HUMAN CAPITAL with
technical wisdom and strengths might ask the question -
With our
expertise (at comparative lesser wages cost), what challenges can we
take on board that will fulfil future NEEDS, fill a NICHE demand at
the head of a wider and stronger TREND?
Catching a directional wave in a timely manner with an eye to the
future - might set off a line of production (to be continually
improved and upgraded) that helps satisfy worldwide future needs.
Looking a Maslow's Heirachy people have bottom line basic needs
for survival, food clothing shelter, energy, and love. Moving on
they have educational self development needs that may lead into an
area of 'work' that provides an income, so they can propergate their
DNA . It's the DNA that's really our master - as a human race we are
servants to it. The goal for the one generation is to provide a
better and more secure world for the next.
Additional to this
come Self-development/actualisation whereby people gain pleasure and
enjoyment from following their interests to the highest levels. In
this area would be art culture and exploration. People look and will
pay for new to them, challenging experiences - that thrill them or
give cudos and status (back home).
There is money in the world
that people wish to relieve themselves of - but it has to be in
exchange for something they can value in the now, or, relive and
talk about to others.
lchic
- 09:22pm Apr 23, 2002 EST (#1723
of 1731)
"Washington's values are not my values .." Karen
HUGHES (Mine Neither!)
http://www.swot-analysis.com/
lchic
- 09:31pm Apr 23, 2002 EST (#1724
of 1731)
"Washington's values are not my values .." Karen
HUGHES (Mine Neither!)
Tourism
http://www.statcan.ca/english/indepth/87-003/feature/tlde1999018002s1a01.htm
http://www.statcan.ca/english/indepth/87-003/feature/tlfeat.htm#yr1999
http://travel.mos.ru/eng/direct/01.html
http://www.gii.co.jp/english/ae8169_travel_and_tourism_toc.html
With Tourism an area has to ask what is unique to it - do
tourists want to venture alone, or, would they prefer the shelter of
organisation which might take the form of special developments that
cater to both their need for 'change' and yet give 'guided insights'
into that new to them culture.
 (7
following messages)
   
New York Times on the Web Forums Science
Missile Defense
| 
