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 - 08:17am Aug 28, 2003 EST (# 13439 of 13445)

The head of the United Nations' nuclear watchdog has called on the United States to set an example to the rest of the world and cut its nuclear arsenal and halt research programs.

The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed Elbaradei, says the US government demands that other nations not possess nuclear weapons.

But, he says in an interview with Germany's Stern weekly, the US is arming itself,.

He also criticised US President George Bush's plan for a national missile defence shield, saying a small number of privileged countries want a nuclear protective shield.

He says the rest of the world would be left outside.

Elbaradei says if people do not stop applying double standards the world will end up with more nuclear weapons.

Nuclear non-proliferation experts have complained that Washington is undermining the goal of global disarmament with plans for new, smaller atomic weapons.

http://afr.com/articles/2003/08/27/1061663822808.html

rshow55 - 08:29am Aug 28, 2003 EST (# 13440 of 13445)
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.

Was the kid who said the obvious thing being "fair and balanced?" - or loyal?

The Emperor's New Clothes by Hans Chrisian Anderson http://www.deoxy.org/emperors.htm

Those are questions that even editors of the New York Times are likely to have problems with - if they think about them. Sometimes I suspect they do. H. L. Menken had a number of things to say about the kind of thought applied - some of them funny.

This statement is "obvious" - but is it loyal?

We should check questions of fact - and decent balance - fit to circumstances. If leaders of nation states wanted facts checked - it would happen. By conventions that say "statements of leaders can't be questioned" - it won't.

I say that it is loyal.

What can the statement indented above reasonably mean? People are stumped - including high-shots at the NYT.

I liked the joke about me and the snuff. I found postings by gwb1 - set out in 12501 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.Lam0bFZ5CPJ.6063082@.f28e622/14155 interesting, too.

People are stumped, in large part, by problems that are logical - and they can do much better - and be more effectively loyal to the things they care about - if they get clearer.

I'm sure some people think I'm moving slowly - but I'm also trying to move carefully - and I believe that I am doing just exactly what I promised D.D. Eisenhower and W.J. Casey that I'd try to do. And serving the national interest, by high standards, while doing so.

Fredmoore's 13429 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.Lam0bFZ5CPJ.6063082@.f28e622/15120 is a good joke - because it works in many ways. Pointing out obvious things can be hard - and can be thought obnoxious - especially when people work hard not to see - and not to show the obvious things.

rshow55 - 08:34am Aug 28, 2003 EST (# 13441 of 13445)
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.

13439 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.Lam0bFZ5CPJ.6063082@.f28e622/15130 is one of many, many, many posts by almarst that are worth considering. Not to be rejected out of hand - which is what gisterme most often wants to do.

I spent some time collecting gisterme's postings - and looking at many of them again.

I'm doing the same with almarst's posts. I think almarst has some big problems with his point of view (as gisterme does) - but think he's right about a lot - and ought to be proud of the work he's done on this thread. I know that work impresses me.

I think it may be making a difference, too. Though this thread is, in various senses, "only a game."

wrcooper - 09:38am Aug 28, 2003 EST (# 13442 of 13445)

Showalter

I think it may be making a difference, too.

Why?

What difference is it making, except to divert or amuse those taking part in it?

If you think it's affecting the thinking of decision-makers and leaders, please explain why you think that. What's your evidence?

almarst2002 - 12:02pm Aug 28, 2003 EST (# 13443 of 13445)

xx

(2 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense