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 (13695 previous messages)

rshow55 - 06:41pm Sep 16, 2003 EST (# 13696 of 13824)
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.

Gisterme - did you actually read what I wrote in

13660 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.gKfQbUHeHtB.971546@.f28e622/15353

13661 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.gKfQbUHeHtB.971546@.f28e622/15354

13663 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.gKfQbUHeHtB.971546@.f28e622/15355

? ? ? ? ?

You got some key points backwards - or if you didn't - you're just picking a fight to relieve yourself of the need to be honest or think.

Your phrase

" If you think that those words describe gisterme

has a big if - do you see where the "if" connects to what I actually said ?

I do think the it would be good if people would read the posts we've both made on this forum - and I think yours are the more important. I think Almarst's are also more important than mine. http://www.mrshowalter.net/Sequential.htm

You missed a point I was trying to make. And I do think you ought to be checked.

http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.gKfQbUHeHtB.971546@.f28e622/15356

jorian319 - 06:57pm Sep 16, 2003 EST (# 13697 of 13824)

I think Almarst's are also more important than mine

It is revealing that even Robert thinks that the moanings of a professional victim-type are more important than his own posts. Maybe he is actually learning something.

Not that I take much stock in Robert's Index of Importance, but at least he's finding out that there is life after VIP audiences.

rshow55 - 07:27pm Sep 16, 2003 EST (# 13698 of 13824)
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.

From 9003 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.gKfQbUHeHtB.971546@.f28e622/10529 to 90012 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.gKfQbUHeHtB.971546@.f28e622/10539 summarizes a good deal of this thread before March 1, 2001 - and an interesting thing, to me, is how few postings I made before Almarst came on the scene. (about 400 over 5 months )

I got more excited when Dawn Riley brought "Muddle in Moscow" http://www.economist.com/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=533129 ) to my attention.

Back then, I was convinced that, one way or another - lchic had connections to the real skinny in journalism.

Boy, was I gullible . .

I was also impressed, maybe wrongly by dialog with our "Bush administration stand-in" gisterme , starting with a powerful one in his first posting .. MD2997 gisterme 5/2/01 1:09pm ...

http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md2000s/md2993.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md2000s/md2998.htm

- - and the sad truth is that I've been so deluded that I've mostly worked trying to help get communication going between those two.

MD1999 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.gKfQbUHeHtB.971546@.f28e622/2484

That work involved great contributions from "stand-ins" who have taken the role of senior Russian and American officials - - a role that has continued since March 1, 2000 207 http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7a163/218

And yes, I have felt that both gisterme and Almarst have been important - if only in a "simulated" role. Much more important - by role, and posting-for-posting, than I've been.

rshow55 - 07:40pm Sep 16, 2003 EST (# 13699 of 13824)
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.

An aunt died - my mother's last living sibling - and I'll be flying out tomorrow early to be with my parents and help with the memorial service, and odds and ends. Will be posting less the next few days.

More Messages Recent Messages (125 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

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