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.

wrcooper - 12:56pm Oct 8, 2003 EST (# 14663 of 14684)

The above report doesn't leave room for much confidence in the feasibility of launch phase intercept, no?

It doesn't even go into the problems of detecting decoy launch vehicles or countermeasures deployed from the rocket in flight or from accompanying defender vehicles.

cantabb - 01:24pm Oct 8, 2003 EST (# 14664 of 14684)

Clearing up the backlog of posts addressed to me or about me !

cantabb - 01:39pm Oct 8, 2003 EST (# 14665 of 14684)

fredmoore

- 11:40am Oct 8, 2003 EST (# 14642 of 14645)

Still smarting under, eh ?

Let's see if you make any sense through your raw hostility.

Cantabb, You behave like a chook in a barnyard with a Mme Defarge complex which makes you obsessively and compulsively nit at Rshow. Can I put it any plainer or more simply? Only your delusions of grandeur prevent you from understanding this truth.

Your senseless analogy again. You forget that I am NOT as quiet as Mme Defarge supposedly minding her own business.

You don’t mention it, but what do you think rshow55’s behavior here appears to you ? Or, it doesn’t matter ? Try if you can to look at the cause too-- a rational approach : symptoms alone ain’t sufficient – may be to you in case of the poster you so strongly defend.

My only stake in highlighting this truth is to show serious MD forumites that you are a threat to any contructive dialogue taking place. Hopefully they will then see your destructiveness and not encourage you as has been the case.

What “truth” ? You think your school yard tactics, right from your very first response to me, was an attempt to start a “constructive dialogue” ?

My posts don’t depend on how the wind blows. Or on the kind approval of the posters. I conduct my debates by myself, individually, no assistance or encouragement needed from the gallery.

Obviously you (worried about poster approval) don’t even see rshow’s “destructiveness” -- something that so many posters have seen and described in detail ? What does it make you ?

You obscure relevant discussions. Rshow obscures relevant discussions also but he at least shows some capacity for analysing missile defence and is worthy of continued attempts at steerage.

Did you see any “relevant discussions” here BEFORE my arrival some 3 weeks ago ? I’ve NOT seen any since [NOT counting your interest in KAEP, in late response

to pressure for on-topic discussion; and WRCooper's again]. And, what I’ve seen from you is either school yard/’barnyard’ tactics, or continued rationalizations to put a better face on your poor analogies and lame poetry. NOT relevant on-topic discussion !

You on the other hand propagate your barnyard nonsense with the delusion you are somehow above reproach and no matter how much you evade and resist that notion you cannot erase its truth.

Parroting again ? Your hostility seems to run your thoughts here. What “barnyard nonsense” – UNLESS you’re talking about your own, so amply demonstrated right from the beginning. What “delusion” ? Unless you’re referring to ALL the “relevant” discussions you imagined here, or rshow’s “destructiveness” that you still do NOT see, even though many posters have.

As for KAEP, If I for one moment thought you were interested I would convey all the information you could want. However YOUR overt hostility and your inability to read my posts on KAEP from june 18 2003, lead me to the conclusion that you are an utter waste of time and effort.

You don’t see YOUR “over hostility” in YOUR comments, including these ? What “inability to read [your] posts” ? You gotta get over the school yard habit of parroting what I told you before. Do you think you had anything remotely significant or relevant in your posts here, other than the schoolyard/barnyard tactics and ‘parroting’ ? You still have NOT described the KAEP relationship you think there is to MD, as applicable here.

In future therefore I will, unless you can get with the program and show that you can be constructive around here, just reply to your meaningless 'personal delusion' posts with the anagram PSOT ... Post something on Topic. That at least will put pay to your stupid FISKING.

What “program” ? Yours {schoolyard/barnyard, senseless analogies & lame poetry)?

Wha

(19 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense