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.

cantabb - 11:50am Oct 26, 2003 EST (# 15671 of 15678)

rshow55 - 09:19am Oct 26, 2003 EST (# 15665 of 15670)

cantabb made some interesting postings last night - and Jorian did, too.

Sounds a little condescending, doesn’t it ? Matters little even if you didn’t find them ‘interesting’.

Can you address them ? That where the rub is !

Will answer these [cantabb] questions within an hour. The easiest is the last. I'd like to meet face to face, for at least a few minutes - with someone on the NYT masthead - from my perspective, Robinson or Carley might be best - before being referred "down the line" .

After a meeting - a comfortable "win-win" from everybody's perspective shouldn't take much time or be too difficult.

Write to them. Why bother even mentioning (much less repeating here ad infinitum) on THIS thread your own personal situation and plans ? “Win-Win” (a much overused term) has to involve some mutual stake/benefit: What do you think NYT has to gain here, what's at stake for them. They can continue to ignore your (and lchic) on this forum, or block you both. That simple.

I see nothing BUT a personal motivation on your part. You seem to be trying to use a public forum to resolve your various claims, repeated often BUT not substantiated --- e.g., your beef with Casey-Eisenhower, CIA, NYT, your still-unsubstantiated “house arrest,” interference in your ability to “function,” and myriad of other paranoid theories about various posters.

rshow55 - 10:20am Oct 26, 2003 EST (# 15667 of 15670)

The NYT, CIA, FBI, DOD, NSA and the White House couldn't possibly work that way [suggested by cantabb, based on your version and your approaches so far]. The leaders of big institutions couldn't work that way - and shouldn't try to.

They don’t work publicly, do they ever, on “intelligence matters” ???

And, besides, you have NOT even provided an iota of verifiable evidence that whatever association you claim was ever a matter of intelligence that you portray it was.

Good solutions ought to be as simple as possible (though no simpler) and fit the circumstances.

Leaders have complicated jobs, …….and people who know enough to judge can become comfortable with what is to be done.

Find that out from THOSE “leaders” directly – NOT through NYT forum.

I hope to sort out a situation with the NYT that meets NYT needs as well as possible -.... the best possible circumstances for the TIMES, from where we are, would also be big wins for me……, for the short time it would take to sort things out from here, the NYT does, too.

Again, absolutely nothing to do with THIS forum or posters. Obviously, you’re looking for “big wins for” you. On whatever grounds, beats me ! Such personal matters NOT relevant here, anyway.

Of course I have to ask analogous questions about the TIMES' needs - though of course the stakes for the TIMES are much smaller than they are for me - and I would be happy to accomodate NYT needs that don't conflict with my own.

Whether you’re telling the truth or NOT – your responsibility and your accountability . I see NO “stakes” for the NYT here -- YOU provided none so far. As to your own “stakes,” you know that: We don’t, and don't need to know.

Arrangements that fit NYT institutional needs and also fit my own ……….and satisfy my needs well, too - look easy. Negative sum results only need happen if there is an operational decision to see that I remain crippled in the ways that matter to me for action. I don't see how that meets anybody's interest.

You have given us NO idea why you should feel so ‘crippled'. NOT UNLESS you wanted to or wanted to say so. No evidence provided.

Any answer that is a sensible "win-win" solution between me and the NYT will put me in fair position for dealing with the federal government without any need for institutional involvement from the NYT - thou

cantabb - 11:51am Oct 26, 2003 EST (# 15672 of 15678)

cont'd to rshow55:

Any answer that is a sensible "win-win" solution between me and the NYT will put me in fair position for dealing with the federal government without any need for institutional involvement from the NYT - though such help might be easy for the TIMES, and of course I'd appreciate it.

There’s NOTHING that I see from your posts that NYT can provide you a “win-win” situation in your problems with the government ! You’ve NOT made clear, with any supportable evidence, what exactly are these problems – with CIA and/or NYT , and why you think it necessary to inflict all this on this thread.

rshow55 - 10:21am Oct 26, 2003 EST (# 15668 of 15670)

In case anybody on NYT staff wanted to move things faster than they're moving, they could call me. For a stable solution that does not break up in a mess or a fight - I think things are moving fine - but I'd be very, very pleased to get a call - and if I had that call - I'd come to NYT as fast as a meeting could be arranged.

The problems are YOURS, NOT NYT’s, as far as I can gather.

rshow55 - 10:22am Oct 26, 2003 EST (# 15669 of 15670)

I'm hoping, by the end of the day, to send a short email to the "top dog" at the TIMES - with links available so that others can deal with something that he'd be too busy to attend to.

I am NOT holding my breath.

(6 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense