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 - 04:05pm Oct 26, 2003 EST (# 15693 of 15733)
ultimately TRUTH outs : TRUTH has to be morally forcing : build on TRUTH it's a strong foundation

affects Oz too

bluestar23 - 04:05pm Oct 26, 2003 EST (# 15694 of 15733)

So, as of just last week, the MD is actually up and running, good for Bush...

lchic - 04:07pm Oct 26, 2003 EST (# 15695 of 15733)
ultimately TRUTH outs : TRUTH has to be morally forcing : build on TRUTH it's a strong foundation

...thought the guy was referring to the non-functionality of US entities in the O/S situation re work/job allocation

lchic - 04:08pm Oct 26, 2003 EST (# 15696 of 15733)
ultimately TRUTH outs : TRUTH has to be morally forcing : build on TRUTH it's a strong foundation

.... and he kept it under his BUSHell

bluestar23 - 04:09pm Oct 26, 2003 EST (# 15697 of 15733)

http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/program/nmd/

this is really the best link for any MD information I've ever seen...totally comprehensive...a real education...

cantabb - 04:25pm Oct 26, 2003 EST (# 15698 of 15733)

lchic - 03:56pm Oct 26, 2003 EST (# 15687 of 15697)

Equilibrium initially intended to use the word homeostasis ...

You had used it ['equilibrium'] wrt borders !

'Homeostasis' normally used to indicate physiological stability of the 'normal', which is often subject to various stresses, internal and/or external. Analogous to 'equilibrium', but hardly the case in most international borders, except for those mentioned (and similar).

bluestar23 - 04:40pm Oct 26, 2003 EST (# 15699 of 15733)

Jorian:

"with trying to devlop and deploy a nuclear warhead/missile system undetected."

Well, I think that you and Mr. Cooper need to go back and re-take your Psych-101 Course....people have fundamental psychological reasons for developing obvious and large-scale weapons systems that date back, naturally, to the dawn of recorded history. You constantly forget that such systems are developed openly, paraded majestically, and propagandized around the world (just look @ Chinese astronaut) not just for the internal reasons I gave but for absolutely crucial reasons of national pride and regime power and legitimacy. NO nation is about to embark on a Grand-Scale, Giganto nuclear Project of any sort,...and then hide it away! Nobody!

rshow55 - 04:54pm Oct 26, 2003 EST (# 15700 of 15733)
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.

I think that's right. And that's a reason why it is practical - with just a few advances in negotiation practices - to get big reductions, or even elimination of nuclear weapons.

Smaller deterrents will do. We won't get rid of them. http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md9000s/MD9908.htm But we can take risks and costs down - and by a lot .

(33 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense