New York Times Forums
The New York Times

Home
Job Market
Real Estate
Automobiles
News
International
National
Washington
Business
Technology
Science
Health
Sports
New York Region
Education
Weather
Obituaries
NYT Front Page
Corrections
Opinion
Editorials/Op-Ed
Readers' Opinions


Features
Arts
Books
Movies
Travel
Dining & Wine
Home & Garden
Fashion & Style
Crossword/Games
Cartoons
Magazine
Week in Review
Multimedia
College
Learning Network
Services
Archive
Classifieds
Book a Trip
Personals
Theater Tickets
Premium Products
NYT Store
NYT Mobile
E-Cards & More
About NYTDigital
Jobs at NYTDigital
Online Media Kit
Our Advertisers
Member_Center
Your Profile
E-Mail Preferences
News Tracker
Premium Account
Site Help
Privacy Policy
Newspaper
Home Delivery
Customer Service
Electronic Edition
Media Kit
Community Affairs
Text Version
TipsGo to Advanced Search
Search Options divide
go to Member Center Log Out
  

 [F] 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.


Earliest Messages Previous Messages Recent Messages Outline (14920 previous messages)

almarst2003 - 07:06pm Oct 13, 2003 EST (# 14921 of 14924)

The Turkish military has warned it will respond to any Kurdish attack on its soldiers in Iraq as it held talks with its NATO-senior the United States about where to deploy soldiers in the occupied country.

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/4253F223-BE04-4575-88D9-FE5EB776DBEB.htm

The "No Kurds" Zone?

almarst2003 - 07:22pm Oct 13, 2003 EST (# 14922 of 14924)

Turks trade troops for hard U.S. cash http://www.canoe.ca/Columnists/margolis_oct12.html

Washington is delighted. Having run out of troops itself, the U.S. is arm-twisting and bribing all and sundry to send soldiers to Iraq.

almarst2003 - 07:27pm Oct 13, 2003 EST (# 14923 of 14924)

Recall that the congressional authority Bush invoked required him to "determine" that:

Reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq, or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and

Acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001.

On March 19, 2003, Bush informed Congress that Saddam posed "a continuing threat to the national security of the United States" by "continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations."

Only days before, U.N. inspectors had reported that Saddam appeared to be cooperating and as best they could tell had neither nukes, chem-bio weapons, ballistic missiles or the makings thereof.

Furthermore, Bush and Rice have admitted, "We have no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved in the September 11th attacks."

But she and Bush claim to have believed last year that Saddam did have "weapons of mass destruction" and that he might give them to terrorists for use against us.

"Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option."

Rice claims that almost everyone then agreed with Bush's assessment and cites last year's UNSC Resolution 1441 as proof.

But they didn't agree, not even then. That resolution – passed at Bush's insistence – merely requested that Saddam let the U.N. inspectors verify that he hadn't attempted to reconstitute his nuke, chem-bio and missile programs.

The U.N. inspectors went in, searched for four months and concluded that he hadn't. Now, after six-months, the U.S.-Brit-Aussie group has discovered no "evidence" to the contrary.

Nevertheless, Rice claims that "the Iraq Survey Group is finding – and recording – proof that Iraq never disarmed, and never complied with U.N. inspectors".

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=35029

Rice... Long legs... and the rest to match.

wrcooper - 07:35pm Oct 13, 2003 EST (# 14924 of 14924)

klsanford0

You are the only person who has really tried to focus on missile defense posts of late, and I really welcome your effort. However, I see you're still getting sucked into commenting on rshow55 and lchic and cantabb's posts. Are you beginning to understand the futility and frustration that accompanies any such attempt?

jorian319

You're an amusing satirist, but you also have interesting things to say when it suits you. I wish you that you, too, would give up the quixotic tilt-at-rshow show of wit against nitwit and join in with klsanford0 and Lou Mazza and I and discuss the important missile defense issue.

I would like to see missile defense become an election year issue. I pretty much view George Bush as the Second Coming of the Beast, and if bringing attention to his lack of probity in promoting his hare-brained neo-Star Warsism can help bring him low, that'd be super duper.

Let's help reveal the absurdity and political cynicism that drives this juggernaut.

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  / Missile Defense


To post a message, compose your text in the box below, then click on Post My Message (below) to send the message.

Message:



You cannot rewrite history, but you will have 30 minutes to make any changes or fixes after you post a message. Just click on the Edit button which follows your message after you post it.