New York Times Readers Opinions
The New York Times

Home
Job Market
Real Estate
Automobiles
News
International
National
Washington
Business
Technology
Science
Health
Sports
New York Region
Education
Weather
Obituaries
NYT Front Page
Corrections
Opinion
Editorials/Op-Ed
Readers' Opinions


Features
Arts
Books
Movies
Travel
Dining & Wine
Home & Garden
Fashion & Style
Crossword/Games
Cartoons
Magazine
Week in Review
Multimedia
College
Learning Network
Services
Archive
Classifieds
Book a Trip
Personals
Theater Tickets
Premium Products
NYT Store
NYT Mobile
E-Cards & More
About NYTDigital
Jobs at NYTDigital
Online Media Kit
Our Advertisers
Member_Center
Your Profile
E-Mail Preferences
News Tracker
Premium Account
Site Help
Privacy Policy
Newspaper
Home Delivery
Customer Service
Electronic Edition
Media Kit
Community Affairs
Text Version
TipsGo to Advanced Search
Search Options divide
go to Member Center Log Out
  

 [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 (11108 previous messages)

lchic - 05:13am Apr 5, 2003 EST (# 11109 of 11119)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

... spam poster ... can't be bothered to complete the posting .... the Pope knows what 'mass' is ... mixed mass-mess ages.

"" the attraction of one mass for another mass. He called it the Law of Gravity --

translated

-- the attraction of one monetary-mass for another monetary-mass. He called it the Law of the Gravy Train.

------

J- on the flag --- had you stated clearly in the first instance your 'flag' problem there would have been no misunderstanding. You 'thought' you'd been clear -- yet ambiguity said otherwise.

-------

lchic - 05:16am Apr 5, 2003 EST (# 11110 of 11119)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Tony Blair's mob have that 'extra' weapond over and above anything in the Pentagon arsnel ... he's sent the cartoonists in to propagate 'TRUTH'

Brits are marketing 'TRUTH'

So that's new!

rshow55 - 05:20am Apr 5, 2003 EST (# 11111 of 11119) Delete Message
Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES. Click "rshow55" for some things Lchic and I have done and worked for on this thread.

Lunarchic is a WONDER !

And there ARE things that we can find out.

If "all the basics that could be known WERE known" people would be more free in the ways that ought to matter - if people had much sense at all.

A lot of people do.

lchic - 05:21am Apr 5, 2003 EST (# 11112 of 11119)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

CHIC is back in downUnder fashion week!

Elle Chic .... lchic

_______

TV pics aledgedly of Saddam on his first 'public' outing in three years were flashed across the globe ...

His obsequeous rent-a-crowd was a 'full - standing-room only' male affair ....

lchic - 05:22am Apr 5, 2003 EST (# 11113 of 11119)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Had Saddam had a brain

had he thought

had he reason

He know that his

own act

of actions

are Treason!

dR3

rshow55 - 05:23am Apr 5, 2003 EST (# 11114 of 11119) Delete Message
Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES. Click "rshow55" for some things Lchic and I have done and worked for on this thread.

If we really knew the basic things - we could, and would want to, start teaching them in nursery school - and people of all ranks and ages would care - and know what the "core curriculum" was for raising human beings. And on the things that everybody really needed to know - everybody would agree.

There would be few enough of those things.

And plenty of choices for everybody involved.

More Messages Recent Messages (5 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

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





Home | Back to Readers' Opinions Back to Top


Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company | Privacy Policy | Contact Us