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.

rshow55 - 09:38am Jul 21, 2003 EST (# 13066 of 13068)
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.

Key phrases, from a generally conservative and careful newspaper - state a case that is now clear:

. . .the Bush administration grievously miscalculated the human and financial costs

. . . the Bush administration exaggerated its central argument for the mission — the threat of Baghdad's unconventional weapons.

. . . The administration seemed to think that when the war ended, Iraq's government institutions, ranging from the army to the waterworks, could simply be placed under new leadership and returned to operation, providing order and basic services to a free Iraq. Everything about the American plan, including the size and composition of occupying military forces, was misconceived.

. . . There was also a naïve assumption that opposition would melt away once Saddam Hussein was displaced.

. . . By invading Iraq without Security Council approval, Washington greatly complicated the task of enlisting foreign help

. . . Nevertheless, establishing a free and peaceful Iraq as a linchpin for progress throughout the Middle East is a goal worth struggling for, even at great costs. We are there now, and it is essential to stay the course.

. . . . It is not too late to set Iraq on a more promising course, but that will require the kind of staying power and cooperation with other nations that this administration has rarely shown much interest in mustering.

The uses of words are nuanced, and often the interpretation least favorable to the administration is the fair one to use. - - - - -

Fredmoore asks about trust. Trust, to be useful in any long term way, or under complicated circumstances, has to be based on things that are true - so that good decisions can be made.

The past is over - it can't be undone. But it is important to learn from the past - because present action and future results matter.

rshow55 - 09:44am Jul 21, 2003 EST (# 13067 of 13068)
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.

rshow55 - 05:38pm Mar 30, 2003 EST (# 10798 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.2Kj5bis2rPK.137427@.f28e622/12350

Almarst , lchic and I have been very concerned with problems of press function for a long time. http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md2000s/md2088_2089.htm

We've discussed many of the problems in terms of Weaver's News and the Culture of Lying 5943-44 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.2Kj5bis2rPK.137427@.f28e622/7390

Here's http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md2000s/md2088_2089.htm , with its main links working , and other links available by date at http://www.mrshowalter.net/calendar1.htm . . .

( If you read the links, you'll see that back then, as now, I had plans - but that executing those plans required working cooperation with power - which was denied ).

Power is always essential - ideas alone can only do so much - for reasons that Berle, and many others, have made clear. See Berle's Laws of Power http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.2Kj5bis2rPK.137427@.f28e622/826

(1 following message)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense