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 - 12:22pm Apr 6, 2003 EST (# 11180 of 11187)
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.

Within limits, everybody's entitled to some delusions. But when things matter enough - for real reasons - people should check.

It isn't hard to do - but a lot of people, all over the world - think it is impossible to do - think that "you can't prove anything." - there's a long philosophical argument about that - for 2500 years.

On things that matter enough - with work - it is really possible to be sure. People are certain of a lot of things - and very often - for very good reasons.

I started this year with rshow55 - 8:20am Jan 1, 2003 EST (# 7177 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.CHUialHC6iL.882731@.f28e622/8700 :

" I think this is a year where some lessons are going to have to be learned about stability and function of international systems, in terms of basic requirements of order , symmetry , and harmony - at the levels that make sense - and learned clearly and explicitly enough to produce systems that have these properties by design, not by chance.

10124 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.CHUialHC6iL.882731@.f28e622/11669

If people were prepared to calm down - and check some things carefully - we'd be there.

So near, and yet so far.

I'd be pleased for the checking process to happen - the Bush administration would have plenty to be embarrassed about. But not everything.

robkettenburg03 - 02:03pm Apr 6, 2003 EST (# 11181 of 11187)

Here's some NEW PICTURES of our War to liberate Iraq! - http://www.faktinfo.de/irakkrieg-bilder/

My Home Page - http://www.angelfire.com/ny5/robkettenburg

rshow55 - 05:24pm Apr 6, 2003 EST (# 11182 of 11187)
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.

10294-5 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.CHUialHC6iL.882731@.f28e622/11840 makes points from 21 March that make sense now, as well.

"Workable systems - at the level of neurons - small groups - large groups - and groups of groups - tend to work themselves out - with interfaces and multiple levels of control - according to a pattern much like the picture in the Maslow reference.

( The image in Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs by William G. Huitt Essay and Image : http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/regsys/maslow.html is a clear, important, and general example of a hierarchichal system of control with interfaces of mutual constraint. )

"There have to be limits on the Treaty of Westphalia rules - there have to be connections, and constraints between actors at "the top of their pyramids" - connections between the "pyramids" and of course that means limitations on the US as well.

. . .

"Almarst is making important points. . . .

"We need to get a workable system of international law negotiated into being - and that means some issues have to become clearer - and there needs to be some exception handling , and understanding of how that exception handling is to be judged. There is no going back to the Treaty of Westphalia.

"We can do a lot better now.

" Doing so, every reasonable concern that Almarst has raised can, I believe, be much better handled than today. . . . .

"If the US military does well, as it seems to be - and if Tony Blair is given enough backing by the US - the big things that need to fall into place for that to happen seem to be falling into place now.

That's true today. I hope the meeting in Belfast goes well.

. . .

"I hope all the Iraqi forces find ways to surrender, and can be offered ways to surrender.

"I hope they surrender in ways that they can be proud of, considering things with decent balance. In a way that preserves things they can reasonably be proud of. Rather than fight for things they ought to want to turn away from and be ashamed of.

"Surrender rather than fight ineffectively and die trivially for the ugly, destructive and shameful purpose of preserving the reign of Saddam for a few extra minutes, hours or days.

(5 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense