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 - 04:58pm Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15979 of 15992)

rshow55 - 04:28pm Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15973 of 15975)

Here are things I'd like to be able to attempt - with a reasonable chance of a fair hearing. ( list )

Why a "hearing," and why a "fair hearing" ? Why can't you do what you are interested in doing, find ways to finance it, if you need to -- like anybody else does. Talking about you want to do is pathetic IF somehow allowed insinuates something you NEVER have "explicitly" indicated.

Positive sum games require that everybody involved with effective veto power be willing to let other people get what they need. Otherwise - things are unstable.

You think people don't know THIS ?

I've been trying to teach that lesson here - explicitly, and by example. And think that Eisenhower would have approved whole-heartedly.

What have you done "by example"? Nothing you said on this is 'explicit' either. Ambiguity is NOT that.

First, LEARN the lesson. BEFORE you even think of 'teaching' it.

How do you KNOW Ike "would have approved whole-heartedly" ? What specifically would he have approved ? Do you need his 'approval' NOW to do anything ?

What have you done "by [what] example" As I said, try to it yourself.

bluestar23 - 05:00pm Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15980 of 15992)

CASTLE ROCK, Colo.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 27, 2003--SANZ (OTCBB:SANZ) and its technology partner EMC Corporation (NYSE:EMC) were selected to provide a robust networked storage infrastructure for a Continuity Of Operations (COOP) environment for the MDA. A comprehensive, enterprise-wide, data management strategy will be developed first, to address the disaster recovery requirements for the many applications and locations in the MDA's distributed and heterogeneous environment. "SANZ and EMC have pulled together a top-level team that is experienced in designing and implementing high-capacity disaster tolerant data management/COOP infrastructures," according to John Jenkins, CEO of SANZ. "Members of this team have implemented similar projects for other Federal Agencies and Commercial companies including but not limited to the Defense Logistics Agency, Marine Corps, NASA, FBI, INSCOM, DOD Heath Services, Navy, and Secret Service."

bluestar23 - 05:02pm Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15981 of 15992)

http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20031027005115&newsLang=en

The link....

cantabb - 05:11pm Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15982 of 15992)

rshow55 - 04:50pm Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15976 of 15979)

I wrote "the big boss" a not-too-long letter - sent it Sunday. He read it, and had his secretary call me and say so, which I appreciated. He routed it in an entirely reasonable way - got a useful letter from a senior line guy - (and the right guy, on the org chart, to talk to me) - have a couple of calls in to him - not yet returned.

Good of you to let us know. But do we really need to know this at all ?

With a meeting - I think things could, and should, work out just fine - and be a good illustration of what "win-win" solutions look like - and what they take.

So, DO it.

I am not asking the NYT to vouch for anything they don't reasonably know - and I'm looking for ways I can meet my needs without stepping on NYT needs. To get that worked through - there would have to be some talking. With people able to see each other's responses - and zero in on comfortable solutions.

Talk wherever and whatever and with whomsoever you need to -- this ain't the place !

rshow55 -

I think there's enough to this thread that I should be talked to.

In fact, if one is familiar with this thread, I doubt he/she would want to talk to you !

But then, others disagree with some things I've said without any justification at all except for the thread itself.

That's NONSENSE, isn't it ?

Those who have disagreed with you GAVE you the chapter and verse of why. Many, many times on many issues.

I believe that this thread is now, and has been for a while, the largest interconnected corpus devoted to negotiation practices in the world - or at least one of very few. It includes some probably distinguished, if anonymous, posters.

It AIN'T ! Self-aggrandizing nonsense.

The rest of your post is mere senseless repetition of things NEVER proven.

lchic - 05:18pm Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15983 of 15992)
ultimately TRUTH outs : TRUTH has to be morally forcing : build on TRUTH it's a strong foundation

68 posts since last here ... 'I'll be back! = later' ... will read to date

(9 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense