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 (15029 previous messages)

gisterme - 10:54pm Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 15030 of 15067)

Great rap, Fred! :-)

gisterme - 11:11pm Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 15031 of 15067)

Fred -

"...The equations are thus:

300million Rules 6billion ===== CRASH BANG

6Billion Rules 6Billion ===== LONG PROSPEROUS FUTURE

KAEP: 300million/6Billion >>>>>>converting slowly but steadily >>>>> 6BILLION/6BILLION..."

Ummm, Fred, and with all due resepct, I'd suggest that you might need to explain some of the variables in your equations if you'd hope to have them make sense to anybody but yourself.

300 million what / 6 billion what ?

How can: (300 million anything / 6 billion anything) EVER equal (6 billion of it / 6 billion of it) ?? ??

Have you invented a new arithemetic operator? :-) If you you ought to pick a different symbol to represent it. Most folks take the one you used to mean "division".

lchic - 11:14pm Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 15032 of 15067)
TRUTH outs ultimately : TRUTH has to be morally forcing : build on TRUTH it's a strong foundation

Think Nationally & Globally!

gisterme - 11:19pm Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 15033 of 15067)

Fred -

"...The equations are thus:

300million Rules 6billion ===== CRASH BANG

6Billion Rules 6Billion ===== LONG PROSPEROUS FUTURE

KAEP: 300million/6Billion >>>>>>converting slowly but steadily >>>>> 6BILLION/6BILLION..."

Ummm, Fred, and with all due resepct, I'd suggest that you might need to explain some of the variables in your equations if you'd hope to have them make sense to anybody but yourself.

300 million what / 6 billion what ?

How can: (300 million anything / 6 billion anything) EVER equal (6 billion of it / 6 billion of it) ?? ??

Have you invented a new arithmetic operator? :-) If so, you ought to pick a different symbol to represent it. Most folks take the one you used to mean "division". And, just out of curiosity, where do the other 5 billion 970 million come from? (Using US billions here). What's the "conversion" that slowly creates the extra 5.97 billion?

gisterme - 11:22pm Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 15034 of 15067)

"Think Nationally & Globally!"

Great Scott!! Lchic, I think you've coined an oxymoron!

wrcooper - 11:28pm Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 15035 of 15067)

In re: http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.UsrvbnVpODi.2598762@.f28e622/16709

jorian319

I agree with Will ,,,

Of course you do.

[A]n ineffective MD system is worse than none at all.

I can hear Dubya now: "We got us a missile shield. So if any terrorist group launches a missile at us, we can shoot it down. So bring 'em on! I say to every terrorist who thinks he can threaten America, go ahead, fire your missile! You'll see that America is ready for you. Bring 'em on! But, beware, you can run but you can't hide. Just ask Ossama Bin Laden. I mean Sadaam Hussein. No, I mean, uh, Dick Cheney!"

And falsely elevating the importance of missile defense will take an unfathomable toll on our economy, our resources, and worst of all, on our national gestalt.

I hope what it will do, once the American public figures out it's a scam, is topple this smarmy regime of corporate hacks and oily fundamentalist creeps.

More Messages Recent Messages (32 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

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