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 (12533 previous messages)

rshow55 - 09:03pm Jun 14, 2003 EST (# 12534 of 12537)
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.

Re: "What would James Bond have done?" Bond embodied the social graces Fleming absorbed in society - and the Bond movies are interesting in part for such reasons.

11848 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.rL3rbgbgfnm.603670@.f28e622/13463 contains a little about the following.

On a Saturday in early September 2000 I went into the National Museum of Art in DC, just after the museum opened - looking for Natale Angier. Natalie Angier's picked a very unrecognizable likeness for her book image and image here, http://www.nytimes.com/learning/students/ask_reporters/angier.html where her background and comments are very interesting. I'd heard from Dawn Riley that Ms. Angier had agreed to be there - and at Dawn's suggestion I'd gotten a videotape The Art of Telling Science March 27, 1999 - that gave me a good look at Ms. Angier - a very impressive, sensitive, warm, dominant human being - who combined femininity with enormous weight of judgement - and well earned status, gracefully carried. By this time I'd read her books and many of her articles - and had written to her and told her how good I thought her writing was. I told her the exact truth about how good I thought that writing was - and was conscious of my motives. I wanted to work with her, if a mutual interest could be established. On essentially any terms where she'd have me. And I needed to find a way to communicate enough about my security problems to permit me to function. I felt that if I she knew what I needed, and thought I deserved the help - she could make the contacts I'd need, in the sort of way Casey and I had discussed.

The New York Times not only knows how to tell the news - it also knows how to keep secrets that ought to be kept - and it has connections that permit it to communicate anything it wishes to to anyone of reasonable status anywhere in the world. I expected that Ms. Angier had communicated enough with Dawn Riley and George Johnson, and read enough of my postings - to know that I had security problems. I hoped she'd also listened to one or both of the conference phone calls Dawn had organized for me, that seemed to involve NYT people. ( On one of those calls, I'd been confused, and had thought I was dealing with Angier - when the person calling me identified herself as Dawn Riley rather than Natalie Angier on that call - I was so disoriented, of a short time, that I dropped the phone - and Dawn gracefully comforted me and carried me past my embarrassment to a good conversation.)

I'd driven in from Madison Wisconsin for that meeting - a meeting that my wife knew about - driving the last leg from about 4:30 am on.

I had arrived in Washington a couple of hours early - enough time to look at a Washington Post and a New York Times - and review my thoughts. There are certain things you can only communicate face to face, after building up rapport - and I was glad that Natalie Angier, who I admired enormously, was willing to meet with me on that Saturday morning. I had my head full of things I wanted to say - ways I hoped the meeting would go. The only way to look spontaneous in a high stakes situation that I've ever managed is to be rehearsed - and I felt that I'd thought of a lot of possibilities - enough so I wouldn't fall flat on my face.

I'm a little under 6'1", and weighed about 205 at the time, had a 45" chest, a 35" waist, and was in fair trim. I could, I think, have done fair justice to a military uniform by active duty standards. (Two years of worrying later, my weight was 165, and I'd lost a lot of bearing. I now have my muscle back.) My hair's gray - almost white, my face is lined - and at that time I was 52 years old, and looked it. I'm not handsome but not terrible looking - though I do have a physical defect that some people (I'm sure short people especially) notice. I got my nose broken a few

More Messages Recent Messages (3 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

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