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.

rshow55 - 05:53pm Oct 21, 2003 EST (# 15367 of 15370)
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.

Cantabb comments: "There always will be "some problems to resolve." No matter how much we wish and try, difficult to see ALL problems resolved "gracefully" or in the "reasonable interest" of all "

No, not ALL problems can be solved in the interests of all. Lots of times, there's no solution to a problem.

But specific problems often can be solved - and solved well - including mine related to this board.

Bluestar23 says "If only it was true " in response to this from me.

"It seems to me that you should. I'm looking for a reasonable way that I can leave this thread without having been mangled. You should think about helping me do that - and if you can't think about that - why should I think about your concerns?"

I meant to say what I said above. It is true. Perhaps this would be a strain on Jorian and Cantabb's imagination - but I think the questions below are worth asking.

Suppose Robert Showalter is telling the truth, within the normal limits, about his situation. What would he need to be able to leave this board and function?

and a related question:

Suppose Robert Showalter is telling the truth, within the normal limits, about his situation. Under what circumstances is he crippled in the ways that matter for function?

It isn't necessarily true that meeting my needs costs the NYT anything - at least if " the average reader or stockholder of The New York Times" might be looking. Meeting my needs might be something that "the average reader" would be proud to have the NYT do.

Not necessarily. But worth considering.

On the other hand, if there is an operational decision to see that I remain crippled in the ways that matter for action - what would "the average reader or stockholder expect me to do? "

I try to be proud of the decisions I make - and want to make decisions that I could explain, if need be, to everybody I care about. If others try to do the same - a lot could work out well. And should.

rshow55 - 06:02pm Oct 21, 2003 EST (# 15368 of 15370)
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.

Here are things I'd like to be able to attempt - with a reasonable chance of a fair hearing.

A solar energy project that I think be worth more to the US national security than anything that can possibly happen in Iraq.

13039 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.JB4Lb3S6QEm.3958633@.f28e622/14716

13040 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.JB4Lb3S6QEm.3958633@.f28e622/14717

13041 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.JB4Lb3S6QEm.3958633@.f28e622/14718

13042 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.JB4Lb3S6QEm.3958633@.f28e622/14719

I'd a lot rather work on that project than this board.

- - -

And some related projects - involving a structure that I know works - worked out at considerable expense to me, the government and investors, that believe could be useful not only for me - but for the nation and the world.

I've said this before:

I would like to be able to set up something very much like AEA again - and do it honestly - and work with Lchic in that format.

I'd like to be able to do that with people involved in AEA fully informed, and satisfied to the extent that was reasonably possible.

In ways that were reasonably satisfactory to my wife, her husband, the New York Times, other members of families involved, the federal government, and other people more-or-less connected. In ways that most people at the UN, if they happened to notice, might think fair.

What would I need to be able to get a fair hearing for these things? What would cripple me, or anybody else?

Hint: Human organizations have to act and it is important, for action, to be positive what you want to do and able to explain it.

If people are to use this board - and if I'm to be able to function - what happened on this board has to be explained concisely in the ways that matter for action.

That doesn't necessarily conflict with any valid interest of the newspaper.

We don't have to be in a "zero sum" or "negative sum" game here. We could arrange a postitive sum game.

- - -

But positive sum games require that everybody involved with effective veto power be willing to let other people get what they need.

Otherwise - things are unstable.

I've been trying to teach that lesson here - explicitly, and by example.

(2 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense