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.

jorian319 - 11:32am Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15933 of 15940)

In some situations, there are problems that can only be confronted by a concerted effort to focus on the win-win aspect of proposed solutions. Solutions must solve, and the definition of "solve" must be agreed upon by those for whom the effort is important. Without such agreement, the solution will be unstable and likely not scalable to the application as required by constrictive circumstance. Unstable solutions are well known to blow up in people's faces from time to time, often at great cost to innocents to whom neither the problem nor its solution is important. Discussion of the relationship of those working on solutions to those tring to focus on defining the problem is itself problematic for the third party - the one injured by actions taken by people either involved in the process of definition or in pursuit of the win-win solution required for amenable resolution. This human dynamic is seen to be ubiquitous throughout every arena wherein conflict seeks an equilibrium instead of real resolution, which can be recognized by a good faith examination of the various aspects of thoughtfulness that reflects the genesis of the problem itself. For the past several centuries, since my intitial involvement with Descartes in the development of Principles of Philosophy, certain parties with whom I hade contracted verbally have failed to deliver on their parts of the underlying agreement. I am being held hostage in my own skull and am seeking resolution through a seance whereby I might get a face-to-face meeting with the perpetrator(s), one of whom I suspect to be part of the Bluestar clan, which I have long thought to have obsconded with the balance of the Descartes estate. There are principles at stake, as well as students and teachers, and this should be important for all readers of this forum to keep in mind as we pursue the greater good for Humankind, and, hopefully long overdue justice for the wrongs done me in the past.

cantabb - 11:45am Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15934 of 15940)

rshow55 - 11:07am Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15926 of 15933)

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 .. ...

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. .......

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

On the AP article posted, your anaysis is over-simplistic and lack focus --as usual. Generalities don't resolve anything.

rshow55 - 11:14am Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15929 of 15933)

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 - and work out relationships that look good and stable, on balance, to both sides - and that can actually be made to work.

If that's not possible - fights are inevitable - and the parties "might as well go ahead and fight."

A> lot has happened since I sent this postcard. But nothing that has given me any reason to doubt what it says - or doubt that what it says needs to be learned. http://www.mrshowalter.net/LtToSenateStffrWSulzbergerNoteXd.html

To craft agreements that are stable - there are technical things to be sorted out - and it seems to me that we're well on our way to getting the principles clearer.

More of your personal matters -- of absolutely NO interest to this thread.

Delusion of self-importance and -grandeur is just your own delusion, nothing more !

rshow55 - 11:48am Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15935 of 15940)
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.

From the above:

Solutions must solve, and the definition of "solve" must be agreed upon by those for whom the effort is important.

And often enough - to find out - it is necessary to try things out - and ask - to see what would work. And also to ask what words mean.

For certain kinds of problems - some face to face contact is necessary for a "meeting of the minds." You need some feedback on how people feel.

And some discussions about how the "solution" might work in particular circumstances. For example

"how would this work administratively - when I have to deal with a particular group I have to deal with?"

There may be a lot of workable answers - but no way to know them without kinds of discussion that go much better face to face.

Face to face - you can get a sense of what's acceptable - and if nothing is acceptable - you come to know it.

jorian319 - 11:48am Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15936 of 15940)

Delusion of self-importance and -grandeur is just your own delusion, nothing more !

Didn't I just say that? Want me to repeat it?

(4 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense