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.

lchic - 12:30pm May 9, 2003 EST (# 11539 of 11566)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Casey

Showalter you've made the points that Casey was interested in getting solutions to what he saw as C20 'stumper problems'.

I was wondering why he defected you back from Optimisation Solutions to 'the maths' at the time that he did

(and quite without regard for your loyalty to investors)

.... has a composite been developed on what he saw as 'the problems' ...

and how he invested in 'others' - yourself included to come up with answers, methods, and the like

You know your major areas in the early Eighties were Optimisation/prototyping and 'the math'

My thought is -- what had he instructed others to do --- and how did your delegated task zones fit in with the work of others

What i'm trying to ask is ... was his logic in ripping the financial carpet from under you ... related to his wanting a solution to 'the math' to fit in with other cauldons he had 'on the boil' at that time.

lchic - 12:39pm May 9, 2003 EST (# 11540 of 11566)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Course outline : “Technology in a Dangerous World” --- refs include

http://web.mit.edu/sts/academics/UGsyllabi/sts.069-U-F02.doc

Hughes, “The Evolution of Large Technological Systems,” in Bijker, Hughes, and Pinch (eds.), The Social Construction of Large Technological Systems

MacKenzie, Knowing Machines,

Hughes, “MIT as System-Builder: SAGE,” in Rescuing Prometheus, pp. 15-67

MacKenzie, “Missile Accuracy: A Case Study in the Social Processes of Technological Change,” in Bijker, Hughes, and Pinch (eds.), Social Construction, pp. 195-222

lchic - 12:44pm May 9, 2003 EST (# 11541 of 11566)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

an 'l' of a difference :)

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=deflected

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=defected

rshow55 - 03:13pm May 9, 2003 EST (# 11542 of 11566)
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.

Lchic , you raise important questions in 11539 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.uUzPaD7W8Lb.0@.f28e622/13132

There's a lot for me to work through to answer them in a responsible, understandable way.

I can give you a fairly short answer related to a part of what you wrote

"I was wondering why he defected you back from Optimisation Solutions to 'the maths' at the time that he did

. . (and quite without regard for your loyalty to investors)

To say why involves some details -and I don't know all of them. The when provides some context. Casey killed AEA's Oppenheimer offering - at the 11th hour - just before Christmas, 1979 - a few weeks after the seizure of hostages in Iran.

I married Geraldine Haberlach on December 8, 1979 - after holding off marrying for some years, waiting for a secure situation that I thought I'd achieved with the Oppenheimer offering. Casey knew of that marriage decision, and something about its context.

There's more to the story than that.

I'll say this now. At the time - I thought Casey had some good reasons - but was wrenched.

I thought Casey was wrenched, too. He was very apologetic - and that seemed sincere.

To write more, I've got to review notes, and I'm in the process of doing that.

I believed then, and believe now, that I was working in the national interest, on a problem of massive national importance. In retrospect - that still seems reasonable. I also felt that I was being entirely honorable to my investors. In retrospect, I've some reservations about that - but I was in a bind - told them everything I dared, and felt that the information I was witholding, and had to withhold - favored AEA.

So far as I could tell - in a situation where my knowledge was limited then, and remains limited, I thought Casey was being honorable and public spirited in his dealings with me, too.

Neither he, nor I, could forsee the future - then or later.

lchic - 05:20pm May 9, 2003 EST (# 11543 of 11566)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Bush - with an eye on an upcoming election - speaks against semi-automatic guns

The gun lobby are mad ... but their votes will still be for Bush rather than the Demos

Pity Bush couldn't have had a heartfelt stance guns with an eye on civil logic rather than an election

(23 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense