New York Times Forums
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 (13408 previous messages)

rshow55 - 10:38am Aug 26, 2003 EST (# 13409 of 13417)
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.

SOME complicated moral and ethical questions CAN be reduced to simple answers that USUALLY work - and that have a strong presumption in their favor.

People say and do things

What people say and do have consequences, for themselves and for other people.

People need to deal with and understand these consequences, for all sorts of practical, down to earth reasons.

. So everybody has a stake in right answers to questions of fact that they use as assumptions when they think about what they say and what they do.

Some simple poems, that could be taught to children early - say some basic things. Kids and their parents might be better if they learned one of lchic's poems http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.yL4hbg7OBSq.5598017@.f28e622/3745 . And in a little while, that poem might be learned with a small addition http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.yL4hbg7OBSq.5598017@.f28e622/3784 .

We need to do better than we're doing - - and we can.

- - - -

If we are loyal to our country, and to the people we care about - we have an obligation to learn to do better than we're doing.

I am being loyal. I am doing just exactly what I promised Eisenhower and Casey I'd try to do - to the best of my ability.

I was assigned to work out and explain things about "game theory" and negotiation that needed to be worked out and explained - lest terrible things happen.

Sometimes, it seems to me that some progress is being made.

Damn slowly, but looking back, it does seem to me that some things are getting through a little. But very slowly. And some terrible practical and moral mistakes have been made by the Bush administration. 13355-6 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.yL4hbg7OBSq.5598017@.f28e622/15046

More Messages Recent Messages (8 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

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