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 - 01:37pm Sep 5, 2003 EST (# 13528 of 13533)

A SECRET blueprint for US global domination reveals that President Bush and his cabinet were planning a premeditated attack on Iraq to secure 'regime change' even before he took power in January 2001. The blueprint, uncovered by the Sunday Herald, for the creation of a 'global Pax Americana' was drawn up for Dick Cheney (now vice- president), Donald Rumsfeld (defence secretary), Paul Wolfowitz (Rumsfeld's deputy), George W Bush's younger brother Jeb and Lewis Libby (Cheney's chief of staff). The document, entitled Rebuilding America's Defences: Strategies, Forces And Resources For A New Century, was written in September 2000 by the neo-conservative think-tank Project for the New American Century (PNAC).

The plan shows Bush's cabinet intended to take military control of the Gulf region whether or not Saddam Hussein was in power. It says: 'The United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.'

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1221.htm

rshow55 - 03:22pm Sep 5, 2003 EST (# 13529 of 13533)
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.

Carter Issues Warning on North Korea Standoff By JAMES BROOKE 1:52 PM ET http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/05/international/asia/05CND-KORE.html

Former President Jimmy Carter warned in Tokyo today that the current standoff is the world's "greatest threat."

. . .

"Unfortunately, both sides have violated some . . . agreements," Mr. Carter said, criticizing Pyongyang for enriching uranium in order to make bombs. "At the same time, the United States has refused direct talks, has branded North Korea as an axis of evil, has declared an end of no-first-use of atomic weapons, has invaded Iraq and has been intercepting North Korean ships at sea."

. . .

In return for North Korea's giving up its bombs and its bomb-making facilities, Mr. Carter said, the United States should give North Korea a nonagression pact, negotiated and guaranteed by North Korea's neighbors.

"A unilateral decision by the United States, the North Koreans would not trust," he said. Other incentives, he said, could include "the lifting of all economic and political sanctions against North Korea and the opportunity for that little country to become completely absorbed in world affairs on a normal basis."

For a sense of how huge the penalties of isolation are ( for an individual or a "little country" ) - see The growth of Human Powers Over the Past 100,000 Years http://www.mrshowalter.net/Kline_ExtFactors.htm .

The slopes of those curves give us reason to fear disorganization - but to hope for progress. There's been plenty of progress in the past - once people got their sociotechnical systems straight.

gisterme - 04:46pm Sep 5, 2003 EST (# 13530 of 13533)

Robert -

"...Gisterme often wants a reader to think he's an important personage..."

Not so, Robert. It's you who want people to think that gisterme is an important personage. After all you're the one making such assertions. I'm the one who's saying "it just aint so".

In my opinion, your attempt to transform myself and others into some sort of poobahs is about your only hope of justifying all the time you spend on this board and adding some legitimacy to all the "off the wall" stuff you post here. 'Doesn't work for me. That seems to me to be a fundamentally dishonest thing to do; not only dishonest to others but dishonest to yourself.

gisterme - 04:47pm Sep 5, 2003 EST (# 13531 of 13533)

Will-

"'Nuff said..."

Thanks.

jorian319 - 06:00pm Sep 5, 2003 EST (# 13532 of 13533)

Robert:

"...Gisterme often wants a reader to think he's an important personage..."

Gisterme:

"Not so, Robert. It's you who want people to think that gisterme is an important personage. After all you're the one making such assertions. I'm the one who's saying "it just aint so". "

Oh go ahead, Gisterme - tell Robert you're important. Your importance is obviously of paramount importance to him. Maybe if you would just feign the importance that Robert craves in an audience, he'll stop having to crow about the importance of his important points to important people.

Hey, Robert, you're right. Sort of. Gisterme used to be important. Then came Viagra ...

(1 following message)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense