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 - 02:33am Jun 25, 2003 EST (# 12660 of 12690)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

The 'gist' Gist reads as if you are 'a part' of that wonderful US government ... if you weren't who you are (who ever that be) ... that is, if you lived in another bygone time ... which character in US history would you inhabit for a day ... whose mind would you want to live within and steer -- and to what purpose?

[Example | Helen Caldicott would have liked to have jumped in the 'of late' Billy the Kid Clinton's mind and got the Nukes down --- but would those chummyRummy's have allowed the her - inside of him, to live? How hard is it to get those NukeWinterNukes down?]

-----

Showalter should be back tomorrow --- I'm impressed --- he's taken a deserved rest :)

lchic - 03:05am Jun 25, 2003 EST (# 12661 of 12690)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Showalter's secret is ............ as he checks out all those dots .... HARD WORK .... as in daily grind!

gisterme - 03:11am Jun 25, 2003 EST (# 12662 of 12690)

rshow55 - 10:03am May 18, 2003 EST (# 11755 of ...) http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.h5o6b1yLjfR.402965@.f28e622/13365

"...Old solutions that worked very well have been discarded - even forgotten - in large part because patterns of "exception handling" have been screwed up..."

I can't say it's because of screwed up exception handeling; but departure from old solutions that worked well would surely seem to be the cause of decline in American public eductaion. That's a good example of what I think you're trying to say.

"...Some things screwed up - there were corruptions -but we ought to remember what worked..."

Absolutely.

"...Especially when those people cover their tracks - as they typically do..."

Teacher's unions are masters at that.

I believe that there's no person more valuable than a good teacher and that there's no person more worthless than a bad one. Unfortunately, it seems that teacher's organizations have largely fallen under the bureaucratic illusion that it's funding that makes the world go 'round. That's not true. It's good teaching that makes that happen.

I think that good teachers should get paid as much as any other professionals but that teachers should also be as accountable as other professionals for the results of their work.

You'll never hear leadership from a teacher's organization say that. They want the money without any accountability.

The fact is that today, in scaled dollars, much more is spent per student than was spent in say, 1950. In 1950, a high school diploma meant that a student had acheived a certain level of education, measured against established standards. Well, that's still true today; but the current standard of measure does not rise to a level anywhere close to what it was in 1950 or even in 1968 when I graduated high school. These days, it seems that the standard of measure is instead adjusted to make sure that the teachers look good regarless of the quality of education that the kids get. It's a sad state of affairs and, in my view, a greater threat to the continued long-term success of America in the world arena than any other that exists today.

The "dumbing-down" of America is taking place whether it's intentional or not. Only a grass-roots effort by parents and students is likely to reverse that trend. Lawmakers certainly havn't done anything about it. If anything, I'd say they've contributed to it over the years by providing educational funding without proportional requirements for educational results.

gisterme - 03:25am Jun 25, 2003 EST (# 12663 of 12690)

lchic's devistating question (according to Robert):

"...If the 'future' can be seen to be fine .... what went wrong with the present?..."

That's easy to answer, lchic. Nothing went wrong with the present. You're just forgetting relativity. Compared to the past, the present is fine. If you don't believe it, just go to the electrical box on your house and shut off the main breaker, then go shut off the water and gas valves. Better disconnect the phone too, and using your last flush, send the cell phone down the commode. You could certainly survive, lchic, all or our ancestors did; but I'd suggest that you'd soon appreciate the meaning of fine in the present as compared to the past.

I can only hope that "fine by comparison" in the future is equally meaninful when compared to the present.

(27 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense