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 - 11:27am Apr 6, 2003 EST (# 11175 of 11180)
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.

Planning the Battle for Baghdad By ERIC SCHMITT with BERNARD WEINRAUB http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/03/international/worldspecial/03BATT.html includes this language:

WASHINGTON, April 2 — The objectives of the battle for Baghdad will be a microcosm of the war itself: destroy the forces that support President Saddam Hussein, avoid civilian casualties, limit damage to civilian infrastructure and provide aid.

" If it becomes an all-out, hand-to-hand urban battle for Baghdad, then we'll have done something wrong," a senior military official said.

That's just the sort of language responsible people use in the course of an intervention with someone held to be insane.

Right now, what is in the practical and moral interest of the people involved?

I've been assured, almarst that you have no connections with Vladimir Putin, but I believe you often sympathizes with Putin's difficulties. Reading this, I did, too.

Russian Muslims Split on a Call for Holy War Against U.S. By MICHAEL WINES http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/03/international/worldspecial/03CND-RUSSIA.html

Looking at everything, there's plenty to be afraid of, and much to be angry about. Even so, I'm not sure that things are going so badly.

Surely not so badly as they could.

I'm hopeful.

almarst2003 - 11:30am Apr 6, 2003 EST (# 11176 of 11180)

"I don't think Tony Blair is crazy at all."

And I think HE IS.

He must be either crazily naive to assume he has a mission to make a "better" world in a failed tradition of a Christian Golden Rule. Particularely when joining the Washington.

Or he must be crazy to assume the World will buy his demagogy and not notice the real intentions of his vision to see Britain taking seat of the "first vassal" and a "good cop" for the Europe.

almarst2003 - 11:39am Apr 6, 2003 EST (# 11177 of 11180)

" If it becomes an all-out, hand-to-hand urban battle for Baghdad, then we'll have done something wrong," a senior military official said.

Didn't we suppose to see just candies and flowers greeting the "liberators" whoes main objectives are To Fight, to Win, and To Protect Their Own Lives? The "liberators" sent to perform oll this for the SOCIAL ENGINEERING project of GEOPOLITICAL dimensions with a huge expected bonus of World-Wide Empire and Profits?

What could be "wrong" with that?

rshow55 - 12:00pm Apr 6, 2003 EST (# 11178 of 11180)
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.

Order truly is a basic need - and reading much of your stuff does give me a lot of sympathy for what Tony Blair has to face.

Almarst - it seem likely to me that, in the ways that matter - you'll lose some fights.

Some, it seems to me, that you deserve to lose.

We need to work out systems of international law and inter-relations that have a reasonable chance of working.

We are not seeing exploitation in any reasonable sense from the Bush administration.

Bad as they are in some ways.

jorian319 - 12:10pm Apr 6, 2003 EST (# 11179 of 11180)

Apparently the only thing that might calm alarmst down a bit, would be if every nation on earth stuck to strictly isolationist policies. Never intrude, mind your own business and everything will be fine. Naive as hell, but he's entitled to his delusion.

(1 following message)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense