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 - 08:29am Oct 9, 2003 EST (# 14713 of 14718)
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.

On this board, lchic and I have been advocating efforts to find shared space - - paths for communication - between adversaries, and enemies locked in impasses.

. A Communication Model http://www.worldtrans.org/TP/TP1/TP1-17.HTML

The diagram on shared space is very general - and the piece is short.

For entirely hard-headed and practical reasons, and other reasons, we need to be able to communicate as human beings.

The NYT is involved in such communication - sometimes including discussions between governments.

I'm honored that people at the NYT are occasionally willing to discuss things with me.

Here's a post on missile defense from a while back - that cites http://www.mrshowalter.net/pap2 on a link that no longer works - but worked for a long time. A link that I appreciated.

http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md2000s/md2677.htm

Issues of missile defense are parts of a larger picture.

We're dealing with primal issues here. I believe that everybody who cares about the survival of the world should consider carefully the concerns about the military-industrial complex set out in the FAREWELL ADDRESS of President Dwight D. Eisenhower January 17, 1961. http://www.geocities.com/~newgeneration/ikefw.htm

The core things Eisenhower warned against have happened. In many ways it is humanly understandable -- but there is a mess, it is as dangerous as it can possibly be, and we need to fix it.

Friedman's piece is beautiful to me today. 13316-7 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.0jhXbXjYMym.1332018@.f28e622/15004

This thread is a "game" in the game theory sense. Some games are more serious than others.

It seems to me that some essential things are working.

cantabb - 08:30am Oct 9, 2003 EST (# 14714 of 14718)

lchic - 08:10am Oct 9, 2003 EST (# 14710 of 14711)

This message keeps appearing ...

"not displayed because cantabb is on your Ignore Posts list" .. I should be so lucky! Lucky! Lucky! Lucky!

NOT as lucky as I am !

Would you mind showing fredmoore how to do it ? Before he hurts himself !

"It got understood and exposed"

cantabb - 08:37am Oct 9, 2003 EST (# 14715 of 14718)

lchic - 08:27am Oct 9, 2003 EST (# 14712 of 14714)

Showalter was saying ...

And, cantabb, was putting it in its rightful place.... <a href="/webin/WebX?1@13.0jhXbXjYMym.1332018@.f28e622/16419">cantabb 10/9/03 8:00am</a>

May NOT have seen that, with head in the sand.....

Looks like a 1-2-3 punch time: NOW, co-ordinated with the schoolyard/barnyard !

"It got understood and exposed"

(3 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense