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.
(11004 previous messages)
lchic
- 10:05am Apr 3, 2003 EST (#
11005 of 11009) ~~~~ It got understood and exposed
~~~~
Time to update elsewhere - perhaps - out!
dccougar
- 10:25am Apr 3, 2003 EST (#
11006 of 11009) Everyone is entitled to his own
opinion but not his own facts.
rshow55 - 10:00am Apr 3, 2003 EST quotes
from - "The Philosopher of Islamic Terror" By PAUL BERMAN -
" In the days after Sept. 11, 2001, many people anticipated
a quick and satisfying American victory over Al Qaeda."
Mr. Berman is setting up a premise for his article that is
completely untrue. It's not even a straw man because it's so
irrelevant. From the very beginning, Bush made it abundantly
clear that any "victory" over terrorism would NOT be "quick
and satisfying", as Berman asserts. And for the record, I am
NO FAN of Bush.
Btw, rshow55, your monologue about Saddam possibly being
dead or incapacitated, possibly for some time, was somewhat
more focused and relevant, though still overly lengthy as
usual. If words are weapons, you're dropping cluster bombs,
not precision-guided missiles. :^)
almarst2003
- 11:47am Apr 3, 2003 EST (#
11007 of 11009)
Former US envoy to Iraq: A 'terrible, bloody'
miscalculation - http://www.antiwar.com/ocregister/bloody.html
Peck, a UCLA grad who spent 32 years as a diplomat, was
careful to preface his remarks with the information that he
had served two hitches in the U.S. Army as a paratrooper and
had faced war, disease and riots as a diplomat, so he takes a
back seat to none in facing danger for his country. He was in
Iraq from 1977 to 1980, served in other Middle East posts, was
coordinator of covert intelligence in the State Department and
deputy director of the Cabinet Task Force on Terrorism in the
Reagan White House.
Noting that George W. Bush's approval rating was 52 percent
on Sept. 10, 2001, and 90 percent on Sept. 12 when he was a
president under foreign attack, Peck suggested a similar
phenomenon might be at work for Saddam Hussein, as despicable
as he is. He said that when you invade a foreign country, the
people there just might view you as invaders rather than
liberators.
Peck thinks the United States will probably win this war
eventually, but it will be harder than our leaders anticipated
and will cost us dearly in national morale, solidarity and
international prestige. And we'll be paying a high price for a
long time to come in increased Middle Eastern instability and
acts of terrorism.
The notion that Islamists hate us because of our freedom or
"because Britney Spears has a bellybutton" is "terribly
stupid," Peck believes.
Most Americans don't want to face the fact that we've been
killing Iraqis for 12 years, through sanctions and bombing,
and that we're constantly in the world's face.
But if we don't stop to consider honestly what really
drives the terrorists of the world we'll have to deal with
them for a long time to come.
The idea that attacking Iraq will end terrorism is a little
hard to square with the fact that we've called up 25,000
reservists to protect the homeland, and Colin Powell has asked
for $6 billion to turn every American embassy into a fortress,
all to coincide with the beginning of the war.
"I hope to the depths of my being I am wrong," Peck said.
"But I'm afraid we will pay a terrible, bloody price for this
miscalculation in Iraq."
almarst2003
- 11:51am Apr 3, 2003 EST (#
11008 of 11009)
former chief executive of the Shell Oil Company
appears to be the leading contender to oversee Iraqi oil
production after the fall of Saddam Hussein, industry
experts who spoke to the Bush administration said yesterday. -
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/02/international/worldspecial/02OIL.html?ex=1050320689&ei=1&en=e56f25399ad0fa33
BEHIND THE BUTTLE SMOKE
(1 following message)
New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
Missile Defense
|