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 - 02:16pm Oct 28, 2003 EST (# 15798 of 15814)

At least ONE of the basic things we learned from 9/11 is that it does NOT have to be a 'missile' launched from anywhere else.

This country will do whatever it takes to protect its citizens [Most other civilized countries, I believe, feel the same way, depending on their resources]. We don't look to Australia, South Africa or EU countries to do this for us.

Solutions proposed by different countries may well be good enough for them, and their protection, depending on their need to divert their resources toward this end. But it would be unreasonable of any country (including our own US) to think that one country's individual solution should/would be acceptable to other countries (or work equally well).

The world never was, is or will be free of conflicts: just documented human nature, a given ! The question then is how long can we maintain a relatively conflict-free period -- for ourselves and other countries. Resources used in preparation of or for self-protection in a confliction can all be better used for many other worthwhile projects -- but you would NOT have much of anything IF you can not protect yourself and feel within your borders. NOT an easy dilemma ! We're made acutely aware of it on 9/11.

jorian319 - 02:18pm Oct 28, 2003 EST (# 15799 of 15814)
The earth spin rate is slowing 2 msc/day as evidenced by the additon of a leap second every 500 days - James "I failed math" Nienhuis

Yes, Blue. Good stuff, thanks.

I am concerned, though about the failure to differentiate offensive and defensive technologies (not that I know of any practical way to do so) as this will certainly slow the "trickle" to a drip.

rshow55 - 02:28pm Oct 28, 2003 EST (# 15800 of 15814)
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 says - "But it would be unreasonable of any country (including our own US) to think that one country's individual solution should/would be acceptable to other countries (or work equally well)." (emphasis added)

Suppose for think about you subsitute assume?

Solutions that worked well enough for everybody - even very well - aren't necessarily impossible, either. But there needs to be ways of thinking about and constructing them.

At the beginning of the year I thought this might be the year people could learn to do that.

I'm not posting a lot, just now - hoping somebody with power could take a simple, cheap, low risk step that might make that possible.

jorian319 - 02:39pm Oct 28, 2003 EST (# 15801 of 15814)
The earth spin rate is slowing 2 msc/day as evidenced by the additon of a leap second every 500 days - James "I failed math" Nienhuis

Solutions that worked well enough for everybody - even very well - aren't necessarily impossible, either.

Solutions to WHAT Robert? Are you still talking about your personal problems as if they were everyone's biggest concern? If not, please give ONE SPECIFIC example we can use to try and figure out WTF you're talking about.

But there needs to be ways of thinking about and constructing them.

Them? Solutions? Again, to WHAT?

somebody with power could take a simple, cheap, low risk step that might make that possible.

Make WHAT possible? How would you know if it were to "come to pass"?

I think that 99.99% of all possible solutions to problems that could be articulated here would go right past you, Robert. That's because you're myopically transfixed on something, the nature of which is only known to forum participants in that it cannot be divined from your posts.

bluestar23 - 02:46pm Oct 28, 2003 EST (# 15802 of 15814)

"question then is how long can we maintain a relatively conflict-free period "

Until the advent of the general stability brought about by Democratic societies (they don't generally attack each other)....most stability has actually been brought about by one power's hegemony. This is not a historical lesson people want to learn, but look at the past of centuries or millenia; the great Empires guaranteed "peace" within thier extensive borders. The Roman Empire, the Habsburg Empire..the British Empire. Although the getting of these Empires required some degree of bloody conquest, once carried out, they then provided the stability for centuries....so perhaps what we need is a new global hegemony of the USA, which is an enlightened Great Power, compared to any in the past. America should therefore play a greater role in the world, not less...

(12 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense