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.

fredmoore - 02:14pm Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 14994 of 15020)

California does not launch missile strikes on Utah because the energy availability and entropy distribution is equal across the US.

In a world where technology ensures equal energy availability and entropy distribution across all nations why would one nation launch missile strikes on any other nation.

Missile defence is that straightforward.

In a world full of brilliant minds, the US can not guarantee an indefinite edge in military superiority. That superiority depends in large part on the good will and support of the majorty of world citizens. Runaway MD spending could undermine that good will and support and thereby render MD spending counterproductive.

KAEP breaks the nexus by providing a verifiable pathway to energy equity across the globe. That energy equity will make disputes between nations as trivial as those between US states.

cantabb - 02:35pm Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 14995 of 15020)

fredmoore - 02:14pm Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 14994 of 14994)

California does not launch missile strikes on Utah because the energy availability and entropy distribution is equal across the US.

What a nonsensical premise.

How about the energy problems of CA in recent years ? You saw any parallel in Utah ?

In a world where technology ensures equal energy availability and entropy distribution across all nations why would one nation launch missile strikes on any other nation.

Missile defence is that straightforward.

Enegry availability and distribution is NOT straightforward; neither is MD !

In a world full of brilliant minds, the US can not guarantee an indefinite edge in military superiority. That superiority depends in large part on the good will and support of the majorty of world citizens. Runaway MD spending could undermine that good will and support and thereby render MD spending counterproductive.

That's NOT the ONLY area we seem to excel in. And for this, the source and reason lie elsewhere -- our economy, our needs and the rest ! We know we waste quite a bit of our resources, and we can't even be sure that a fool-proof MD is going to serve the purpose --- but a South African Rx for our situation is NOT what we're looking for.

KAEP breaks the nexus by providing a verifiable pathway to energy equity across the globe. That energy equity will make disputes between nations as trivial as those between US states.

Your one Rx for everyone and for ALL the ills is naive to say the least.

cantabb - 02:56pm Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 14996 of 15020)

wrcooper - 12:45pm Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 14986 of 14995)

... But the truth is that all of us are simply stuck in a rut, spinning our wheels, with our fingers glued to our mouses (mice?), unable to budge.

Speak for yourself : "stuck in a rut"; "spinning our wheels" !

Some of us are NOT that bound or limited.

Showalter could have written six PhD dissertations and 12 books by now with the amount of effort he's expended on these forums;

You don't write a PhD dissertation by "effort" ALONE.

You need to work on a new, well-defined project and accomplish something significant, worth the degree. Re-hash "Loop Tests" on nothing spoecific and ramblings earn you NOTHING -- except perhaps "spinning wheels" in a rut, much like Showalter on MD.

(24 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense