New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
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.
(15780 previous messages)
rshow55
- 09:09am Oct 28, 2003 EST (#
15781 of 15786) 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.
Negotation links from the Missile Defense thread between
5:05 pm and 10:45 pm - October 23, 2003. Set out a simple
approach - all I asked was some explanations that NYT knows
very well how to give - to things NYT actually knows, or could
find out - on a sheet of paper. Perhaps I was wrong - and I
know it has been denied - but I guessed that people with
serious connections the the New York Times were corresponding
with me - and with interest.
15491 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17204
15492 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17205
15494 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17207
15496 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17209
15498 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17211
15499 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17212
15500 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17213
15501 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17214
15502 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8
@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17215
15503 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17216
15504 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17217
15505 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17218
15506 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17219
15507 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17220
15508 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17221
15509 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17222
15510 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17223
15511 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17224
15512 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17225
15513 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17226
15514 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17227
15515 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17228
15516 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17229
15517 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17230
15518 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17231
15519 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17232
15520 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17233
15523 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17236
15524 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17237
15528 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17241
15529 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17242
15530 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17243
15533 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17246
15534 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17247
15535 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17248
15537 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17250
15538 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17251
15541 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17254
15545 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17258
On an issue of precedents: 15548 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17261
On a "game that is not a game" - stabilization of complex
cooperations. 15559 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bKWsbjPwSqx.5296053@.f28e622/17272
A simple acknowlegement of what happened, to the degree the
TIMES knows it and can say so without revealing names - would
be very useful to me if the NYT could make that
acknowlegement, and make it honestly. If I had this
information - it would be easier for me to ask for some
clarifications and considerations from the government that I
believe I deserve - and it would be easier to explain much
about the way my life has gone since that correspondence
initiated in 1999. If this particular request isn't possible,
I'll understand.
Does anybody doubt
(5 following messages)
New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
Missile Defense
|