New York Times Forums
The New York Times

Home
Job Market
Real Estate
Automobiles
News
International
National
Washington
Business
Technology
Science
Health
Sports
New York Region
Education
Weather
Obituaries
NYT Front Page
Corrections
Opinion
Editorials/Op-Ed
Readers' Opinions


Features
Arts
Books
Movies
Travel
Dining & Wine
Home & Garden
Fashion & Style
Crossword/Games
Cartoons
Magazine
Week in Review
Multimedia
College
Learning Network
Services
Archive
Classifieds
Book a Trip
Personals
Theater Tickets
Premium Products
NYT Store
NYT Mobile
E-Cards & More
About NYTDigital
Jobs at NYTDigital
Online Media Kit
Our Advertisers
Member_Center
Your Profile
E-Mail Preferences
News Tracker
Premium Account
Site Help
Privacy Policy
Newspaper
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 (16664 previous messages)

cantabb - 04:39pm Nov 6, 2003 EST (# 16665 of 16675)

rshow55 - 04:31pm Nov 6, 2003 EST (# 16660 of 16662)

On October 25, Cantabb wrote this: "And, had you written THAT "short" "well-crafted" letter to him and called him, as you had been planning to do, you would have returned from NYC by now, after a visit to CIA, FBI, Rummy, GW, Rice and the whole gang-- and their stand-ins."

I don't know if he has NYT connections - but he spoke as if he had authority.

How in the world could you leap to your conclusion.

And with such a baggage, you think you can do any "job of finding truth"? Not with your inner demons driving you.

rshow55 - 04:31pm Nov 6, 2003 EST (# 16661 of 16662)

Given the investment in time - there has to be a payoff, I suppose

Given YOU investment of time, what do you think you (and lchic) have been working on here for the past 3 years ?

bluestar23 - 04:41pm Nov 6, 2003 EST (# 16666 of 16675)

Showalter goes down with the ship, with all flags flying, right to the end...

cantabb - 04:46pm Nov 6, 2003 EST (# 16667 of 16675)

rshow55 - 04:34pm Nov 6, 2003 EST (# 16663 of 16665)

It isn't "paranoia" for a reader to guess that cantabb and bluestar23 work for the TIMES - it is a very reasonable guess.

Like many other 'guesses' you have made in the past -- only to withdraw them after spinning yourself out. Waste of forum space.

And if they are, what they say about me is sometimes pretty serious.

And pretty astute, you might want to add.

Your inner demons acting up again !

"Can we do a better job of finding truth?" NOT even if it lands in your lap....

However, can you (& lchic) continue to abuse the forum even in its last few days ? : Sure, you can -- and, as you have been doing...

cantabb - 04:47pm Nov 6, 2003 EST (# 16668 of 16675)

bluestar23

- Showalter goes down with the ship, with all flags flying, right to the end...

That's "leaving gracefully"....

rshow55 - 04:50pm Nov 6, 2003 EST (# 16669 of 16675)
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.

And with no choice but to do so.

15811 ( how time flies on this thread) http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.Y8RtbMwOVVm.1839578@.f28e622/17526 includes a poem by Jorian319 that ends:

as long as you can stand your ground,

making sure we hold you down

15815 (same clickthrough" reads

Wars happen for just that sort of reason. Again and again and again and again. Perhaps we're modelling how such things happen.

People who are held down fight back. And for very good and unchangeable reasons.

Now if the "we" in Jorians poem means the obvious thing - the behavior besmirches the most basic brand of The New York Times

" All the news that's fit to print."

If you guys are making that decision - and a test of your judgement is your postings on this thread - there need to be some changes.

More Messages Recent Messages (6 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

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