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 - 11:07am Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15926 of 15931)
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.

China and North Korea Agree on More Nuclear Program Talks by THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Published: October 30, 2003 Filed at 8:25 a.m. ET http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-China-NKorea.html

BEIJING (AP) -- China and North Korea agreed ``in principle'' Thursday that six-nation talks on Pyongyang's nuclear program should be reconvened, official media in both nations said, reporting on an unusual meeting between a top Chinese official and the North's reclusive leader.

China Central Television, in its national evening newscast, also said both the Beijing leadership and Kim Jong Il agreed o the concerns of both sides in the nuclear standoff -- the United States and North Korea -- should be resolved simultaneously .

State television showed Wu Bangguo, the second-highest Chinese Communist Party leader and head of his country's legislature, meeting with a smiling Kim in Pyongyang. Wu is on a three-day ``goodwill'' visit to the North at a pivotal time when China is trying to make sure the six-nation summit reconvenes.

``Both sides agreed in principle that the six-way talks should continue,'' CCTV's anchorwoman said as footage of the two ran. ``China and North Korea support the idea of a peaceful resolution to the North Korean issue through dialogue.''

Sometimes, there are situations where there is no technical alternative to discussions that block out a system of steps - well enough balanced - that are then implemented "simultaneously" - really sequentially in ways that are very tightly coupled.

With different transactions, which are unequal in opposite ways ( one or more very much to the advantage of one side - one or more very much to the advantage of the other) agreed to in a linked system.

Most workable agreements in sociotechnical systems are like that.

If discussion enough for that is barred - stable agreements ( often any agreements ) are classified out of existence for people who are different enough or do not like each other.

Stable systems of agreements can involve a lot of "agreements to disagree" - if the rules are clear .

15315 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.F9s6bP8XSsc.36640@.f28e622/17028

Here's a fact - a fact that isn't so important to know if explosive fighting without end is the objective - but a fact that is important to know if stable resolutions that pass reasonable tests of fairness are to be achieved.

For stable end games - people and groups have to be workably clear on these key questions.

How do they disagree (agree) about logical structure ?

How do they disagree (agree) about facts ?

How do they disagree (agree) about questions of how much different things matter ?

How do they differ in their team identifications ?

Odds are good that if the patterns of agreement (or disagreement) are STABLE and KNOWN they can be decently accomodated. Though it isn't easy to find those accomodations. But if these patterns of agreement or disagreement are NOT known - then situations that involve disagreements are inherently unstable.

We need to Iearn how to agree to disagree clearly, without fighting, comfortably, so that they can cooperate stably, safely, and productively - and when it matters enough, we need to learn how to agree about facts. Even when we happen to hate each other - even when we have reasons to hate each other. It is easy to use words as weapons to keep that from happening.

This thread itself is a very clear, crossreferenced illustration of those principles.

For some jobs, there is no alternative to discussions face to face - with contact long enough so that people get their anger and their fear under control - figure out what each side really wants - an

bluestar23 - 11:07am Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15927 of 15931)

The next day...no one has posted....where is Showalter...?

bluestar23 - 11:08am Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15928 of 15931)

There he is; I should have known..

(3 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense