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 - 10:57am Oct 13, 2003 EST (# 14868 of 14871)

The NYT editorial stresses just the points I have been making in this forum. The bush NMD program is costlier than the actual threat warrants; it's technologically unsound and unproven; the components of the so-called "layered defense" have not been shown to work together. The principal radar to be used in the system isn't ready yet. The issue of counter-countermeasures hasn't been resolved. The argument for deploying the Bush system in such a hasty fashion has not been made.

I particularly liked the comment of Dr. Phillip Coyle III that the Bush program was no more than a "scarecrow" defense. The problem is that the real threat isn't from crows. It's from rabbits and deer skirting the scarecrow and attacking from the ground, not the air.

The way to handle North Korea is to beef up intelligence, use diplomatic and economic incentives to curb their behavior, and, as a last resort, interdiction to destroy any possible real threat--an actual functioning, nuclear-tipped N. Korean ICBM. But such a threat is far from becoming reality. Building a working ICBM is not at all easy.

rshow55 - 11:14am Oct 13, 2003 EST (# 14869 of 14871)
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.

Cooper, now we've both reprinted that fine editorial.

Ideas that people enjoy thinking about are likely to be important to them - and dramatic series that are very popular tell a lot about what people care about. People care about the tension between "what their minds tell them" and "what thier hearts tell them" - and long to combine intelligence with wisdom .

Some of these tensions are embodied in one of the most popular and inflential theatrical series of all time - the Star Trek series.

Spock exemplifies some problems people know exist - Spock is an extra-terrestrial man-like being - extraordinarily intelligent - but emotionally flatter, and much less distracted, than ordinary humans.

Leonard Nimoy as Spock http://www.destinationhollywood.com/movies/startrek/photogallery_11.shtml

Star Trek The Motion Picture

Star Trek The Wrath of Khan

Star Trek The Search For Spock

Star Trek The Voyage Home

Star Trek The Final Frontier

Star Trek The Undiscovered Country

-------------------------

In the more recent Star Trek series - there is a variation on the theme of the hyper-rational, emotionally flat Spock - this time in a lower status form - a robot- Brent Spiner as Lt. Commander Data http://www.destinationhollywood.com/movies/startrek/photogallery_19.shtml in

. Generations

. First Contact

. Insurrection

In both series, there is a Captain who uses the rationality, combined with emotions - in ways that very often work - and he is the leader.

William Shatner as Captain James T. Kirk http://www.destinationhollywood.com/movies/startrek/photogallery_10.shtml

Patrick Stewart as Captain Jean-Luc Picard in ... http://www.destinationhollywood.com/movies/startrek/photogallery_17.shtml

(2 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense