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 (11279 previous messages)

lchic - 08:20am Apr 13, 2003 EST (# 11280 of 11294)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

GU International - Talk - Headers

http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.464

lchic - 08:44am Apr 13, 2003 EST (# 11281 of 11294)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

As seen on GU - Poet Shelley. P B

Politics talk | Europe and the world | Political poetry.

""

I met a traveler from an antique land

Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone

Stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand,

Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,

And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,

Tell that its sculptor well those passions read,

Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,

The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed,

And on the pedestal these words appear:

"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:

Look upon my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"

Nothing beside remains. Round the decay

Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare

The lone and level sands stretch far away.

- P.B.Shelley

fredmoore - 08:46am Apr 13, 2003 EST (# 11282 of 11294)

Gisterme ...

1. A country would only need the presence of a public forum in a mainstrem media outlet to comply. It would be obvious if repression was in force so compliaince could easily be tested on a regular basis. An additional measure, of specifying guaranteed freedom of public access to such a forum (including provision of internet cafes) would be proof of compliance.

2. I don't see any need to complicate a failing UN with population weighting at this time. It's too early in the evolutionary process. The current system should remain but with 1/2 votes and NO veto vote for any country which does not agree to free speech compliance or who have been proven to have taken blocking measures or reprisals against individuals using the forums.

3. The opinions of the forums should not matter to UN voting. Just the fact that they are aired is enough.I believe that the internal pressure generated on regimes by this measure would be sufficient to steer UN members to a more conscionable decision making process from where further evolution such as population weighting may be implemented.

Bringing vastly diverse nations and cultures to a common point of good is not a thing which can take place in one fell swoop. It is an EVOLUTIONARY process dependent more on the MINDS of the citizens of the world than the minds of DIPLOMATS. If the UN starts a process of recognising those MINDS and allowing them a say, even if it is indirect through national forums, then progress will follow. The pace of this progress may be slow, it may be fast but it will happen.

One further note, the public forum posts for and against GWB haven't hurt the US resolve in Iraq or on any other issue and countries such as Russia and China should understand that. They do however raise the Gestalt of the population and although Russia and China may fear that they should understand how it can strengthen and uplift their Nations, and also give them a full UN vote.

robkettenburg03 - 11:23am Apr 13, 2003 EST (# 11283 of 11294)

COPS OPEN FIRE ON ANTI-WAR PROTESTERS IN OAKLAND - http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/news/040803_nw_anti_war_protesters_oakland.html

ARE IRAQI'S REALLY DANCING IN THE STREETS AT THE ARRIVAL OF U.S. FORCES? TAKE ANOTHER LOOK - http://www.iraqwar.ru/iraq-read_article.php?articleId=2561&lang=en

MARINES WIPE OUT ARMY TANK CREW - http://www.iraqwar.ru/iraq-read_article.php?articleId=2800&lang=en

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

lchic - 03:08pm Apr 13, 2003 EST (# 11284 of 11294)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Global business bbc world service (radio) has an interesting program on Iraq ... seems Jordan and Syria have enjoyed 'free' oil from Iraq as helpful neighbours .... expert opinion notes that Iraq has had no 'figures' wrt it's economy - unusual for such a large country ..... there has to be thinking regarding the Political, Social philosophy of structures to be put in place ... the economy handling has to be done with care and build 'itself' .....

Program eventually will be here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/business/review_globbus.shtml

13th April

More Messages Recent Messages (10 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