New York Times Forums
The New York Times

Job Market
Real Estate
New York Region
NYT Front Page
Readers' Opinions

Dining & Wine
Home & Garden
Fashion & Style
Week in Review
Learning Network
Book a Trip
Theater Tickets
Premium Products
NYT Store
NYT Mobile
E-Cards & More
About NYTDigital
Jobs at NYTDigital
Online Media Kit
Our Advertisers
Your Profile
E-Mail Preferences
News Tracker
Premium Account
Site Help
Privacy Policy
Home Delivery
Customer Service
Electronic Edition
Media Kit
Community Affairs
Text Version
TipsGo to Advanced Search
Search Options divide
go to Member Center Log Out

 [F] 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.

Earliest Messages Previous Messages Recent Messages Outline (16183 previous messages)

cantabb - 08:31am Nov 2, 2003 EST (# 16184 of 16228)

lchic - 07:25am Nov 2, 2003 EST (# 16167 of 16168)

Another loyal defense of Showalter and his 'position' (If it can ever be teased out of the cliches). That, as I said, opens you up to criticism you don't like to share.

Doesn't Showalter advocate a shift away from the Nazi Psycho techniques of repressing the people?

Most people have done it, and continue to DO it already -- he ain't that different from a Johnny come-lately.

But his repetition of the unproven, the unsubstantiated over and over again does NOT suddenly turn them true: an all-too-familiar propagandist approach.

Aren't the ideas of, for example: moving towards world peace; shuffling engineers away from products and processes that are used to destroy mankind towards products that actual benefit all ... aren't these ideas and thoughts slightly different from those of Hitler?

Yeah, but NO dfifferent from many others in the peace movement for very long. Nothing original or new, except his lack of specificity, focus and his (along with your) messianic complex.

Showalter advocates peace and progress through changes in mindsets and re=allocation of resources towards styles of thinking and production/products/services that Americans can be proud and happy to deliver.

Ask him to join the back of the long, long line of people who have been not only been doing it but achieving significant things for a long time before him -- ONLY with lot more coherence and logic. Showalter, just a wannabe !

The question I'm interested in is 'WHY' the thought processes, ideas, innventions, innovations and processes discussed by Showalter are 'shot down' by the current bunch of posters on this thread?

Mere cliches and platitudes. Nothing specific, nothing new, nothing original. No rationale (eg: his poster ID and his other obsessions you share). Too much wrapped up in his own personal problems and paranoia to expect him to think rationally.

What does the loyal defense think: not hard to imagine !

Why are these posters HERE?

To put a cold needle to a hot-air balloon !

Why are others, let's call them readers, by-standers rather than participants?

Because of his boring mindless re-hash, ad infinitum (as WRCooper claims) ?

Btw, where are the regulars: gisterme, almarst, freddie(barnyard)moore and others ? Looks like you're the ONLY one left to defend him, something he doesn't seem able to do himself.

I speak with Showalter on a daily basis and this is the fourth year.

Good for you and him. All we see is an expected series well coordinated in defense of each other. But does it make his posts any coherent ? NOT that I can see.

I've triangulated and mentally mapped the information and facts he speaks of .... and believe his story to be true. I've researched and discussed with him these matters in depth and at length - and not found his story in any way wanting.

You may belief everything he says. BUT he hasn't provided what's needed to convince others on any of his numerous claims (What he has been working on or his achievements so far). Your implicit faith in him and his story is admirable, but NOT evidence -- nothing that can be independently verified.

Showalter, an outstanding achiever, was super-selected and placed on the Cornell Program (set up by Eisenhower to hot-house a national intellectual elite), finding the challenges interesting he follows through with the aims of the program. He's supertutored by American-expert-NAMES in specific zones that will give him insight and familiarity with methodolgies and tools to later assist him in solving the problems handed on to him by Eisenhower.

He's not alone. LOT more people are much more qualified. That's the Nash-complex he now wants to assume.

The need to solv

More Messages Recent Messages (44 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  / Missile Defense