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.

jorian319 - 12:24pm Oct 15, 2003 EST (# 15099 of 15116)
"Statements on frequently important subjects are interesting." -rshow55

What are these "fundamental" facts..?

No workie.

Even when everything is optimized for success, the damn thing can't shoot straight. And rest assured that nobody is going to optimize conditions for us in advance of a missile attack.

While I do not harbor vitriol and distain for the current administration to the extent expressed by Will, I am none too enamored of the fundie bunch. If they hitch their collective wagon to the falling star of MD and end up in another line of work because of it, I won't be sorry. That's the best outcome I can envision from any effort ostensibly for MD. The worst outcomes I can envision are truly unspeakable and - most worrisome - seem at least as likely as the shrub-trimming scenario.

bluestar23 - 12:24pm Oct 15, 2003 EST (# 15100 of 15116)

Cooper"

" Better intelligence gathering, radiation monitoring of vessels and aircraft entering our territory, more astute diplomatic and economic maneuvering, and the fielding of a rapid-response interdiction force—these address the real threats. An untried, over-costly and technological dubious missile defense system is definitely not the way the national should proceed."

Well, no....your program is based on your own, IMO, "fundamentally" flawed thinking on the nuclear threat the USA faces. Your program interdicts the dirty-bomb, the container-ship Bomb, maybe the "suitcase" Bomb (though this last is just an urban legend). But these are indeed not the most likely threats...you neglect the fundamental fact that even large terror groups generally lack the technical know-how and facilities to make WMD. They have never done it or come close. Even the Aum cult attack in Tokyo was a dismal flop, and they had PhD Chemists. I have studied that BC side of WMD, and concluded that that area is not likely to be a threat due to difficulties dispersing the agent. The Israeli Army also now no longer officially calls Bacteriological/Chemical weapons "WMD" for the same reasons. Also, the "dirty-bomb" itself may be difficult to make....no terror gang has the ability to make any sort of real atomic device.

Although you may think a rogue nation would bring a container-ship-bomb, on second thought, why do you think they'd automatically get away with this...? Surely the device would be traced to someone sooner rather than later....

You forget the status, legitimacy, and power provided by large Atomic Programs and rocketry to Third World countries. That's how they will openly develop.... Why have a nuclear program and not tell anyone, it's a point of great national pride to have it....even the Israelis now openly boast of their new nuke submarines, for other reasons. Nations aren't ever likely to develop a Bomb in secret and smuggle it on a ship. Their nation would gain nothing....strategically or otherwise.

bluestar23 - 12:28pm Oct 15, 2003 EST (# 15101 of 15116)

Jorian:

"I am none too enamored of the fundie bunch."

More comments like Cooper's, sure to raise eyebrows at the rationality of your subsequent MD analysis....

jorian319 - 12:41pm Oct 15, 2003 EST (# 15102 of 15116)
"Statements on frequently important subjects are interesting." -rshow55

More comments like Cooper's, sure to raise eyebrows

Perhaps an unfortunate choice of words. OTOH, I divine no reason for great concern over the elevation or lack thereof of other people's eyebrows. Entertainment, remember?

(14 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense