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 (11624 previous messages)

rshow55 - 03:24pm May 13, 2003 EST (# 11625 of 11636)
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.

The question "what would it look like, written up in the NYT" is a very good one to think of, when you're dealing with circumstances where "it is easier to get forgiveness than it is to get permission.

That question's been referred to a number of times on this NYT Missile Defense thread.

http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md2000s/md2391.htm

http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md3000s/md3216.htm

http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md3000s/md3532.htm

http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md4000s/md4690.htm

http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md7000s/md7442.htm

http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md7000s/md7448.htm

http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md8000s/md8500.htm

http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md11000s/md11501.htm

1189 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.2vqVab969e0.291537@.f28e622/1517

1907 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.2vqVab969e0.291537@.f28e622/2381

3134 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.2vqVab969e0.291537@.f28e622/3924

3286 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.2vqVab969e0.291537@.f28e622/4133

3385 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.2vqVab969e0.291537@.f28e622/4269

4372 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.2vqVab969e0.291537@.f28e622/5528

4373 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.2vqVab969e0.291537@.f28e622/5529

4826 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.2vqVab969e0.291537@.f28e622/6101

5944 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.2vqVab969e0.291537@.f28e622/7391

7258 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.2vqVab969e0.291537@.f28e622/8783

7714 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.2vqVab969e0.291537@.f28e622/9240

8082 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.2vqVab969e0.291537@.f28e622/9609

9404 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?@@.f28e622/10943

11602 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.2vqVab969e0.291537@.f28e622/13198

jorian319 - 03:44pm May 13, 2003 EST (# 11626 of 11636)

Gee thanks. I'll have to read all those links next time I'm in Singsing for five-to-life.

rshow55 - 04:20pm May 13, 2003 EST (# 11627 of 11636)
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.

Could that be an implied threat?

Search jorian319 . Some interesting posts.

I sent a fax to XXXXXXXXXXXXX, at CIA, and the text of that fax, with his name deleted, and the name of an officer at the University of Wisconsin deleted, is set out, with some references attached, in

MD2470 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.2vqVab969e0.291537@.f28e622/3091

MD2471 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.2vqVab969e0.291537@.f28e622/3093

MD2472 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.2vqVab969e0.291537@.f28e622/3094

MD2473 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.2vqVab969e0.291537@.f28e622/3095

MD2474 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.2vqVab969e0.291537@.f28e622/3096

MD2474 ends:

" it seems to me that if the government wishes to restrict any product of my mind in any way on the basis of national security law - they should talk to me about what the restrictions are. MD2131 rshow55 5/9/02 8:41pm .

And do more than talk - actually make it possible for me to work within those restrictions. That means things that can work, some way or other, within real bureacratic usages.

More Messages Recent Messages (9 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

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