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.

cantabb - 12:24pm Oct 13, 2003 EST (# 14873 of 14882)

lchic - 06:54am Oct 12, 2003 EST (# 14809 of 14863)

Level one - Hell , Level 2 - Earth , Level 3 - 'Reach for the stars .... It's a stick-up!'

“Truth outs in the end : truth has to be morally forcing : build on truth it's a strong foundation”: Not by such Telegraphic inscrutability, am afraid.

lchic - 06:57am Oct 12, 2003 EST (# 14810 of 14863)

Still reflecting ... here's a thought…. If GWB isn't 'au fait' with MD and Starwars, and Postal is ... then why doesn't he choose Postal to run as his vice president next time round ... to maximise smart choices in the big dollar zone of defence.

Penny for your thought……

lchic - 03:51pm Oct 12, 2003 EST (# 14832 of 14863)

Statistically there's an extremely high probablilty that these three monikers are 'the same' poster. klsanford0 bluestar23 bbbuck

There you go again: poster identity obsession.

What statistics ?

wrcooper - 12:25pm Oct 13, 2003 EST (# 14874 of 14882)

TO "MISSILE DEFENSE" FORUM BROWSERS AND LURKERS:

This is a forum to discuss the issues of missile defense. However, there are a few posters who regularly post long, rambling, off-topic posts that divert attention from the ostensible subject of the forum.

I personally hope you will join me and a few other persistent souls in discussing the important issue of missile defense on this forum. To facilitate that end, you would do well, in my opinion, to place these annoyingly off-topic posters on your convenient "Ignore Posts list". Click on "Preferences" and type into the list the logon names,

rshow55

lchic

cantabb

These are the worst of the violators. You will then avoid most of the off-topic material. It's easier than scrolling by.

Cheers

lchic - 12:43pm Oct 13, 2003 EST (# 14875 of 14882)
TRUTH outs in the end : TRUTH has to be morally forcing : build on TRUTH it's a strong foundation

That poster -- don't recall the name -- post 14868 said:

"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."

• beef up intelligence

• diplomatic and economic incentives to curb their behavior

• interdiction to destroy any possible real threat (weapons)

cantabb - 12:46pm Oct 13, 2003 EST (# 14876 of 14882)

wrcooper - 12:25pm Oct 13, 2003 EST (# 14874 of 14874)

What a pathetic appeal !

TO "MISSILE DEFENSE" FORUM BROWSERS AND LURKERS:

This is a forum to discuss the issues of missile defense. However, there are a few posters who regularly post long, rambling, off-topic posts that divert attention from the ostensible subject of the forum.

A problem that pontificating regulars, including yourself, have NOT been able to bring it back ON-topic and focus for the past 3 years. With what can be best described as continual whining.

And, now that someone has taken the bull by its horn -- for the last 3 weeks (not 3 years) you carp again.

I personally hope you will join me and a few other persistent souls in discussing the important issue of missile defense on this forum. To facilitate that end, you would do well, in my opinion, to place these annoyingly off-topic posters on your convenient "Ignore Posts list". Click on "Preferences" and type into the list the logon names,

rshow55

lchic

cantabb

These are the worst of the violators. You will then avoid most of the off-topic material. It's easier than scrolling by.

Cheers

I've been on this forum for the past 3 weeks, NOT for 3 years as the other two. Already tired -- even with your "IGNORE" ?

Don't let the facts mitigate what seems to be your personal peeve at me [based on interactions here, CvsE and elsewhere).

"Ignoring" 2 or 3 or 10 is NOT going to solve the problem. It's a PERSONAL "preference" : putting one's head in the sand -- may be cosy for you but does NOTHING to the forum, does NOT stop others from posting !

Your preference is NOT the solution. Has NOT been the solution, according to your own admission.

Your "appeal" seems as pitiful as your own preference.

lchic - 12:59pm Oct 13, 2003 EST (# 14877 of 14882)
TRUTH outs in the end : TRUTH has to be morally forcing : build on TRUTH it's a strong foundation

Well said Cantabb .... who's really beefing up this forum

and i quote :

" ... someone has taken the bull by its horn ... "

(5 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense