New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
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.
(16633 previous messages)
cantabb
- 12:56pm Nov 6, 2003 EST (#
16634 of 16664)
rshow55 - 12:36pm Nov 6, 2003 EST (# 16633 of 16633)
Comments on Cantabb's comments
Cantabb: "Back to the same set of
self-defeating conditions, eh ?"
rshow: I think they are essential conditions
for a working relationship. And conditions that have to be
accomodated in an arrangement that can be stabilized. That
looks possible to me - but it is another example of a kind
of problem I've been working on here -- The question is how
you produce a "win win" solution under circumstances where
negative sum outcomes are also possible, and instabilities
are a problem.
WHO are you asking to meet and accommodate your "essential"
condition ? Particularly when you have proposed nothing
specific and have no plan, except the same ole` vague
generalities and hope for a "win-Win" etc.
My guess is that's a problem that interests
"the average reader of the NYT. "
Your problems -- so hazy and diffused, at that -- are of NO
interest to "the average reader of NYT." You presume too much
!
Cantabb: "Your 'plans' are your own, nothing to do with
NYT, federal government and UN !
rshow: They are connected in the ways they happen to be -
in the particular circumstances involved.
Makes NO sense.
I said "My partnership with Steve was more
convenient and conventional in a number of ways because
Steve was male.".... For interpersonal relations that work -
things that actually matter have to be accomodated -
especially when, for basic reasons, stakes and emotions are
high. ....... There's no contradiction at all - but it takes
care.
Disjointed simplistic thoughts. Irrelevant here.
AGAIN, you've NOT made anything clear or specific about
your plans. Who's preventing you from working on whatever you
think can work on.
NOT CIA, which expresses no interest in your work; NOT NYT,
which doesn't even want to meet you and is shutting this
thread down, largely because of its abuse by you & lchic.
bluestar23
- 01:42pm Nov 6, 2003 EST (#
16635 of 16664)
Cantabb: "Your 'plans' are your own, nothing to do with
NYT, federal government and UN !
rshow55:
"They are connected in the ways they happen to be - in the
particular circumstances involved."
Here's the heart of Showalter's liar's reality....still
psychotically, delusionally sure that he is "connected" to the
CIA, the NYT, and others....no one else, on any notice board,
who wanted to be taken as a serious, responsible adult would
print publicly such things...you can note how hilariously
"vague" Showalter is, when forced to discuss his "contacts"
with the delusionary public figures...he always retreats into
stupid language like, "connected in the ways they happpen to
be" ....childlike nonsense....he's totally exposed as an
insane person...
cantabb
- 02:03pm Nov 6, 2003 EST (#
16636 of 16664)
He can not answer a simple question. Almost every thing is
turned into a tortured exercise. Unique ability to make a
simple matter into a monster -- mostly for himself.
Do you have any world peace and stability issues you want
made more complicated and confused than ever before ?
I don't know what is he looking for do. I don't think he
does it either. lchic seems to stoke his confusion, instead of
helping him resolve it, so that he could "function."
I tried to help him focus and failed.
What he does and how -- not really my concern.
cantabb
- 02:17pm Nov 6, 2003 EST (#
16637 of 16664)
".. BUT failed." In my post above.
(27 following messages)
New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
Missile Defense
|