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.

lchic - 03:32pm Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 15001 of 15020)
TRUTH outs in the end : TRUTH has to be morally forcing : build on TRUTH it's a strong foundation

http://clinton5.nara.gov/PCSD/Publications/TF_Reports/amer-def.html

cantabb - 03:33pm Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 15002 of 15020)

lchic - 03:29pm Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 15000 of 15000)

The person who needs it MOST is your collaborator: Rshow55 !

http://www.medceu.com/course-no-test.cfm?CID=514

It'd also help him answer the questions he has been evading.

But can he focus ? That's another Q.

rshow55 - 03:34pm Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 15003 of 15020)
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.

"To put it less politely, it is unrealistic to think that by participation in this forum, one can significantly effect global security."

That depends on who is involved. And how many people with influence and ability are paying attention.

How much effort has the NYT put into this thread by now? Somebody thinks the efforts here might be important. Either that, or they are showing, by example, the inflexibility and lack of imagination of American usages and large American institutions - including the New York Times.

To get a lot of problems solved - the NYT would simply have to break one or two "unbreakable" rules that have the purpose of standing in the way of effective action that "doesn't go exactly through proper channels."

I'm quite confident that lchic and I are working on problems of significance - and making headway. Some of the most important problems that there are. Because Eisenhower told me so - and I've seen a lot of reactions - from a lot of people - indicating that we are.

Problem is - it is "improper" to work on large problems - so that large problems continue to go unsolved.

rshow55 - 03:40pm Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 15004 of 15020)
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.

When cantabb asks "can I focus?" it is a good question - but he makes it harder.

He also seems to feel that only small problems merit attention - and that it is somehow "not proper" to work on large problems.

Right now, I feel like taking an nap - in an attempt to focus.

jorian319 - 03:57pm Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 15005 of 15020)
"Statements on frequently important subjects are interesting." -rshow55

That depends on who is involved. And how many people with influence and ability are paying attention.

Well, not to put too fine a point on it, BUT...

...who is involved...

YOU. (and lchic)

how many people with influence and ability are paying attention

Zero. None. Zilch. Zippo. Nada. Goose egg.

I KNOW this after thorough investigation and by virtue of the information made privy to me by my position. Just take it as gospel, Robert, you'll be MUCH happier. NOBODY CARES (much). Have some fun.

cantabb - 04:00pm Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 15006 of 15020)

rshow55 - 03:40pm Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 15004 of 15004)

When cantabb asks "can I focus?" it is a good question - but he makes it harder.

I know, asking you to focus, is in itself 'harder' !

He also seems to feel that only small problems merit attention - and that it is somehow "not proper" to work on large problems.

WRONG.

You can NOT focus on smaller or larger problems ! Besides, WHAT larger/global problems do you think you're focused on ?

Right now, I feel like taking an nap - in an attempt to focus.

Well, that's about all you can do, I guess, when asked a straightforward question.

(14 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense