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.

almarst2002 - 11:50pm May 29, 2003 EST (# 12198 of 12209)

We've turned away most obviously from the casualties. Of course, even during the race to Baghdad the major networks gave little attention to Iraqi suffering, but they did at least keep a running tally of American casualties, offering profiles of just about every one of the initial fatalities. When the number of American dead reached 100 and U.S. troops helped topple the now famous statue of Saddam Hussein on April 9, the media stopped counting and looked elsewhere. The most recent numbers I can find come from mid-May. A reasonable guess is that by now perhaps 170 American military personnel have died in Iraq. This means that "postwar" fatalities, from every possible cause, may already exceed combat deaths during the war.

As for the Iraqi military dead, it's impossible to find an estimate. Even antiwar critics have concentrated mainly on civilian casualties. We know the total is in the "thousands," but whether five, ten, or twenty thousand may never be determined. Somewhat more attention has been given to counting those war-related civilian deaths. Several sources, including a carefully reported count in the Los Angeles Times, put the figure in Baghdad at around 1700 and rising. For the nation as a whole, 4000 would probably be a conservative estimate.

American officials refuse to calculate civilian deaths or to initiate an investigation of which ones were directly caused by the United States. But they have offered a number of odd denials of responsibility. One of the most striking, if least noticed, came on April 25, when General Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, claimed that the 1500 cluster bombs dropped by American forces had resulted in just a single Iraqi civilian casualty. Estimates coming out of Iraqi hospitals, however, put the number of civilian deaths due to cluster bombs at several hundred and growing. Among the most indiscriminate of weapons, cluster bombs spray hundreds of small bomblets in every direction. Five to ten percent routinely fail to explode, but can later detonate when touched or moved by unsuspecting people, often children, who don't recognize them for what they are. These casualties continue to mount.

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=44&ItemID=3686

almarst2002 - 11:53pm May 29, 2003 EST (# 12199 of 12209)

When Japanese imperialism started the Sino-Japanese War on the Korean peninsula in 1894, it said it did so to retaliate against the barbarous China for the sake of the independence and domestic reform of Korea. When Japan annexed Korea in 1910 it did so for the retention of oriental peace, the dignity of the Korean monarch and the reform of corrupt and obsolete institutions.

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=3682

lchic - 05:19am May 30, 2003 EST (# 12200 of 12209)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

"So instead of giving the president the most considered, carefully examined information available, basically you give him the garbage. And then in a few days when it's clear that maybe it wasn't right, well then, you feed him some more hot garbage."

The C.I.A. is now examining its own record, and that's welcome. But the atmosphere within the intelligence community is so poisonous, and the stakes are so high — for the credibility of America's word and the soundness of information on which we base American foreign policy — that an outside examination is essential.

Congress must provide greater oversight, and President Bush should invite Brent Scowcroft, the head of the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board and a man trusted by all sides, to lead an inquiry and, in a public report, suggest steps to restore integrity to America's intelligence agencies.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/30/opinion/30KRIS.html

lchic - 05:23am May 30, 2003 EST (# 12201 of 12209)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Assuming that 'The Poster' who muddies this thread along is a CIA guy ... and assuming 'The Poster' is setting standards for them ... then ..

readers of this thread have a sample of taxpayer paid garbage

can 'see' their tax dollars are wasted

and would have concern

-----

Comes back to the question --- why isn't foreign policy with 'The Parliament' .... when will America 'get real' .... those olden days of the world being 4+weeks sailing time distant have long past!

-----

lchic - 05:54am May 30, 2003 EST (# 12202 of 12209)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Almarst # 12196

"Who does he think he is? God?" asks Eric Robrecht, who plays the piano in the bar. "I worry for my children, your children, the children of the world."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2003-05-29-france-usat_x.htm

HE JUST MIGHT... IF HE CAN THINK AT ALL.

Yet some say he (GWB) is one smart cookie!

(7 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense