New York Times on the Web Forums
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
(16281 previous messages)
- 01:35am Nov 3, 2003 EST (#
16282 of 16303)
Space-Based Missile Defense is now necessary for
- 01:39am Nov 3, 2003 EST (#
16283 of 16303)
From the above:
"Earth is little more than a sitting duck in a cosmic
shooting gallery, the scientists tell us. But that doesn't
mean we can't shoot back. If an asteroid is ever found to have
our planet in its sights, a carefully aimed missile can simply
knock the rock off course.
There's one little problem. It's hard to deflect something
that's coming right at you.
Any boxer understands this. A slight bit of energy applied
to a punch in the right way can turn a roundhouse into a
harmless glancing blow. But if you try and stop an upper cut
by driving your chin directly into it, you'll go down for the
Claudio Maccone at the Center for Astrodynamics in Turin,
Italy, has a boxer's eye for asteroids, and he's developed
what he claims is the best plan for protecting Earth.
Put missiles in space, Maccone says, and hit the asteroids
at an angle."
So now you can see the Missile Defense is necessary for the
very protection of Planet Earth, something the weird
"fruitcake" lchic (and her insane friend) thinks is so
all-fired important....but I have posted the real answer
- 01:40am Nov 3, 2003 EST (#
16284 of 16303)
Save the World with MD, lchic....no asteroids...
- 01:49am Nov 3, 2003 EST (#
16285 of 16303)
"Sees this thought-transfer is necessary within National
No, it isn't...just post on topic like I do...
- 03:25am Nov 3, 2003 EST (#
16286 of 16303)
In can feel a fredmoorism coming on. Here it comes .....:
There was a promotion for a new toilet paper at the local
supermarket. If you could make up the winning name for the new
product then you would receive a years free supply.
Well, Cantabb buys some and takes it home with his contest
entry form tucked under his wing.
The next day he is talking to the checkout, who asks him
what he decided to call the toilet paper. 'Rshow' he said. The
girl looked perplexed and asked why.
"Well it's very resilient, very slippery and takes no
sh&t from me !"
Then Bluey enters the store the next day and he said he
named it 'Lchic' toilet paper .... for the same reasons!
You've got to love this Forum ... eh Vladmir?
Addendum: To his inevitable 'Chicken Sh$t' (CS) reply I
refer Cantabb to post #15939 for my standard response.
YAWN! in advance.
- 05:39am Nov 3, 2003 EST (#
16287 of 16303)
lchic - 11:20pm Nov 2, 2003 EST (# 16269 of 16286)
[to bluestar23]: blue - NEVER presume!
ONLY lchic & rshow are licensed to do this.
Very useful in their search for “truth”: They ONLY know
what to “presume,” when and how.
The leader thinks “we” (rshow + lchic; or the entire
humanity) “can do a better job of finding truth,” and his
'World Asset' thinks (sipping the "syrup") “ultimately TRUTH
outs : TRUTH has to be morally forcing : build on TRUTH it's a
"Truth dispensers" !
(16 following messages)
New York Times on the Web Forums