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
(16499 previous messages)
- 11:16am Nov 4, 2003 EST (#
16500 of 16514)
bluestar: Did you provide your name, rank, and
serial number yet to the Commandant ? She's gonna be BAAACK
Just 'binge' posting by the duo !
Justifies why this forum needed to be shut down. More of
the same doesn't undo the abuse or the damage they caused.
They're just expediting its demise !
- 11:19am Nov 4, 2003 EST (#
16501 of 16514)
True, you don't need a 'super-weapon' just to kill people,
in a fight or as targeted. You need a 'super-weapon' to kill
lot of innocent people, along with the target.
- 11:24am Nov 4, 2003 EST (#
16502 of 16514)
You will note the Palestinians came up with
an explosive charge to blow up an Israeli tank or two
This appears to be something a bit more exotic than that...
the mystery projectile punched through the
vehicle’s skirt and drilled a pencil-sized hole through the
hull. The hole was so small that “my little finger will not
go into it,” the report’s author noted.
The “something” continued into the crew
compartment, where it passed through the gunner’s seatback,
grazed the kidney area of the gunner’s flak jacket and
finally came to rest after boring a hole 1½ to 2 inches deep
in the hull on the far side of the tank.
- 11:32am Nov 4, 2003 EST (#
16503 of 16514)
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.
Jorian, that was a good article. It looks to some experts
like an improved shaped charge on an RPG round - and that
looks reasonable to me. Detonation "optics" of shaped charges
in mass production requires the same sorts of things other
optics does (accuracy, homogeneity) plus some fairly obvious
things to produce a very homogeneous explosive characteristic
- both microscale and batch to batch. They got a more coherent
shaping of a detonation than people were used to - looks like
to me. Can't tell a lot from the article, of course.
Military technology, like other technology, gets refined -
and effective things aren't necessarily expensive in mass
Good reason for avoiding fights when possible - and
learning to make peace more stably - without conceding
anything important about security.
Bluestar says I'm pushing the same old stuff - and
he's right - but I think the stuff is important. Here's a
formula for a "win-win" under circumstances of
acknowledged distrust - from the first day I posted
. Do I propose "obvious" and "simple" symettries? Sure. But
the form of the proposal is worth a look, maybe - in that I've
been trying to explain such approaches, so people can
hear - for some time since Sept 25, 2000. I've thought
the point a matter of life and death - and so I've been a bit
- 11:41am Nov 4, 2003 EST (#
16504 of 16514)
well, it's the end of Showalter's thread.....he'll have to
go on to another thread..he will, but I'll follow him this
- 11:45am Nov 4, 2003 EST (#
16505 of 16514)
rshow55 - 11:32am Nov 4, 2003 EST (# 16503 of 16504)
...but I think the stuff is important.
It's NOT ! You've been told that numerous times. And
after careful examination.
Here's a formula for a "win-win" under
circumstances of acknowledged distrust - from the first day
I posted here.
No such thing as a "win-win" -- Just a compromise, both
sides give some, take some.
- 11:49am Nov 4, 2003 EST (#
16506 of 16514)
"I deeply appreciate the chance to post here. If I can find
a way to make the Guardian glad I did so, I'd be honored to do
so - and would be grateful for the chance of going to
considerable trouble doing so."
Just try to read this sentence...like so many others of
rshow's it doesn't make any sense. No one can figure out what
he's saying, and I'm sure he can't either...
(8 following messages)
New York Times on the Web Forums