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 - 04:39pm Sep 23, 2003 EST (# 13889 of 13893)
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.

cantabb - we don't agree often - but this seems focused to me - and was an attempt on my part to write something basic.

rshowalter - 10:00pm Aug 11, 2003 BST (#1623 http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7b2bd/1792

1624 http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7b2bd/1793

Those postings start:

" I've been arguing for the need for a paradigm shift that is both intellectual and moral - and simple enough to explain and use.

"Including some simple exemplars that lchic and I have worked to focus - that might be usefully taught to four or five year olds. Kids and their parents might be better if they learned one of lchic's poems http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.jbXybOkEHIS.1407399@.f28e622/3745 . And in a little while, that poem might be learned with a small addition http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.jbXybOkEHIS.1407399@.f28e622/3784 . Other exemplars and clarifications might be usefully taught to human beings at more advanced ages, as well.

When lchic used the term "lies" she did not intend it to carry the baggage set out in http://thesaurus.reference.com/search?q=liar - - baggage that says a lot about key human problems.

cantabb - 04:53pm Sep 23, 2003 EST (# 13890 of 13893)

rshow55 - 04:39pm Sep 23, 2003 EST (# 13889 of 13889)

cantabb - we don't agree often - but this seems focused to me - and was an attempt on my part to write something basic.

NOTHING new or focused in the links you posted. This self-referencing is just another attempt to justify how you and your dedeicated friend have been using/abusing the NYT privilege.

You must not understand what fuzzy thinking is: Look at this : rshow55: " I've been arguing for the need for a paradigm shift that is both intellectual and moral - and simple enough to explain and use." WHAT "Paradigm shift" ?

"Including some simple exemplars that lchic and I have worked to focus - that might be usefully taught to four or five year olds.

NO relevance here, is there ? To "focus" ? Really ? NOT the way most others understand by "focus."

Try "focus" and on-topic ! Instead of rambling inanities and references to more of them.

jorian319 - 05:18pm Sep 23, 2003 EST (# 13891 of 13893)

Hey, Robert,

Did you ever notice that most other posters (including the deified lchic) are able to post meaningful thoughts in less than a page and without a single self-referential link???

Did you ever ask yourself "Self, why is it that I'm the only poster who needs to fill pages with links to my other pages full of links to my other pages, while everyone else who makes any sense is able to do so without posting pages and pages of links to pages and pages of links?" ???

mazza9 - 07:54pm Sep 23, 2003 EST (# 13892 of 13893)
"Quae cum ita sunt" Caesar's Gallic Commentaries

Hey Gisterme:

Excellent speech.

Mazza9 {Heh! Heh!)

(1 following message)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense