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.

jorian319 - 09:14am Sep 28, 2003 EST (# 14080 of 14105)
You know that I'm an idiot like you know that Darwinian evolution is true. - James I. Nienhuis

cantabb:

You're making it difficult for Robert to maintain his stranglehold on conversation around here. Shame on you!

cantabb - 02:56pm Sep 28, 2003 EST (# 14081 of 14105)

rshow55 - 08:21am Sep 28, 2003 EST (# 14077 of 14080)

Yet another tiresome repetition !

I see little here that really merits a response. Let me point out a few other things, however:

In your last 3 posts you’ve provided at least 12 links/references to your own posts. ALL previously posted a number of times.

Repeating the same absurdities over and over again doesn’t turn them into anything faintly meaningful -- over time !

rshow55 byline: “Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES.”

Non-sequitur.

But only IF one is able to find/recognize, analyze and assemble facts to develop the most rational picture possible. I see NO evidence of you doing that anytime soon here. And, the way you go about it, I don't expect you reaching anywhere close to this -- the very first step to any conclusion, pronouncement.

rshow55 byline: “Click "rshow55" for some things Lchic and I have done and worked for on this thread.”

Something you have NOT yet been able to summarize with any coherence, when I asked you several times already to do it. Why would one want to look for more of the same ?

Incoherent? The passages look coherent to me…….[passage repeated from previous posts – already addressed] :

“Here's a fact - a fact that isn't so important to know if explosive fighting without end is the objective - but a fact that is important to know if stable resolutions that pass reasonable tests of fairness are to be achieved. …..I'd like to set out better answers to (i) - (iv) above - but not if cantabb is in the position of "judge, jury, and executioner."

Look at cantabb's last few postings - look at how he functions as " judge, jury, and executioner. "

Your own paranoia !

I asked you a few specific questions, repeated them a few times. BUT you STILL have NOT answered them -- nebulous comments are NOT specific answers to straightforward questions Pointing that out is not being : " judge, jury, and executioner." Nothing but your own persecution complex, seen here so often.

I think he's making my case for me - and it is an important case.

The case that: you think your own ramblings are something “important” ?

I repeat it from time to time - because the case is important.

You repeat inanities ! Nothing new, original or specific. Extensive discussions of the same with the ‘regulars’ over and over – doesn’t amount to anything different either.

rshow55 - 08:26am Sep 28, 2003 EST (# 14078 of 14080)

More of the same.

The Eisenhowers, Casey, and a lot of other people have worried about that over time - and I have, too. Countless people, people in responsible positions, have been “worried” about lots and lots of important matters, over the years.

Your constant references to your so-called ‘association’ with the Eisenhowers and Casey are meaningless – WITHOUT evidence that people can assess. Mere hearsay !

I started this year with this: ………..

Matters little !

Sometimes, there is no substitute for showing evidence - though there often are arguments against doing it, especially when the CIA is involved in a direct or tertiary way.

Right. There is NO substitute for valid evidence ? Where is it ["evidence"] to support your various claims ?

IF you can’t show "evidence" of your associations with CIA and other agencies/people, what’s the point of, first, bringing them in here, and then repeatedly stressing when you can NOT (or unable to] show anything to corroborate.

Simple hint: Wake up, NO intelligence agency/associated people EVER discuss such matters publicly – doesn’t happen in the US, Australia, UK, Russia, India, South Africa, or anywhere.

These are emails I sent - modified to delete names of CIA personnel. The unmodified emails are available to the NYT -… I made to a inquiry

cantabb - 02:58pm Sep 28, 2003 EST (# 14082 of 14105)

rshow55 - 08:26am Sep 28, 2003 EST (# 14078 of 14080)

cont'd with overlap...

These are emails I sent - modified to delete names of CIA personnel. The unmodified emails are available to the NYT -… I made to a inquiry from Deutsche Bank Securities July of last year - when a question was asked that I believe was in response to a CIA officer. It contains a number of references to this thread. …..This is a letter I sent to William Safire July of last year. Safire did not respond. I sent a copy to other NYT columnists as well. It contains a number of references to this thread. ….This is a letter that I sent to a number of people who have known me over the years, at about the same time.

Take it up with CIA, NYT, Safire, Deutsche Bank etc. NOT relevant here !

I've made some progress toward getting my personal security situation sorted out to the point where I could work since that time. I've found both the responses and the non-responses interesting.

But there is still a way to go before I can function much beyond my current status of effective house arrest. During that house arrest - I feel that I've been able to clarify some key p

Your personal situation ! NOTHING to do with this forum.

(23 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense