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 (16794 previous messages)

cantabb - 06:40pm Nov 7, 2003 EST (# 16795 of 16804)

rshow55 - 06:20pm Nov 7, 2003 EST (# 16792 of 16793)

cantabb: [re: rshow] "Matter of national security, world peace and stability, and saving lives."

rshow: Yes, that's been a central motivation for me.

I know this IS what YOU believe in -- even if unsubstantiated so far !

Eisenhower played a lot of golf - a lot of it with Scottie Reston - and the reason was that a main conduit into the national consciousness, then as now, is The New York Times .

When I got in trouble - and Casey and I couldn't figure anything else to do - Casey kept saying "if you can't explain it to The New York Times - you can't explain it so it works in this country" - and so he told me, in a pinch, to " come in through The New York Times ". ( Casey distrusted all "intellectuals" - including me - and thought TIMES people were bastards - but smart, plugged in bastards. ) We didn't think about the internet in 1986 - and things have gone differently than anyone could have anticipated.

Have heard all these claims before -- You have NOT substantiated any of this yet !

But I've sure been hoping that folks at the NYT have noticed things I've posted (and especially summaries that Lchic has posted ) because for intellectual influence - in the real culture as it is - this is the place. Warts and all.

Apparently, they have. Finally !

I think that, if the ideas worked out on this thread could be condensed and learned - every bit of effort anybody's put out here would be well worth it.

Apparently, the ideas (most fuzzy and inane) did NOT stand criticism on this thread.

My guess, in September 2000 - was that the odds of the world blowing up - from basic instabilities - and near-total noncommunication between the US and Russia - was maybe 10% year - ... maybe that was just a deluded guess - but I think Eisenhower might well have made that guess, too.

The sky wasn't falling, was it ?

Lets see --- six billion people And a tenth chance of dying from nukes per year A "statistical expected value" of a hundred Jewish holocausts, per year or one point six million "expected deaths" per day. Many, many WTC disasters per hour. But just a guess. Making that guess, I've done the best I could - and so has lchic . [emphasis added]

What have you & lchic done in this connection, any way ? YOu STILL have NOT answered this question.

Now, communication between the US and Russia is much better -..

Thanks to YOU ?

Now maybe I'm deluded (some would delete the "maybe" ) but if NYT people have been watching - this thread may have been a very good use of my time. And if gisterme and almarst have had connections I've suspected - and lchic has suspected - a very good use of time.

What's "very good use of [your] time," is for YOU to determine. But what I've seen here was NOTHING but total waste !

You and lchic have "suspected" a lot of things that weren't true. And apparently, not having learned the lesson, both of you continue to do that.

rshow55 - 06:43pm Nov 7, 2003 EST (# 16796 of 16804)
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.

I'll confess that, considering the "never should a NYT person admit their identity" board standard - I was concerned when these posts occurred. My wife Geri was, as well.

I was afraid a NYT reporter was being roughed up - and was worried that the NYT itself was not only "plugged in" - but actually subject to physical intimidation.

If top people at the NYT were actually subject to physical intimidation - or worried about it enough to temper their journalism - think what could happen to the country.


Someone follows me everywhere I go They takeing pictures of our house

cantabb - 06:50pm Nov 7, 2003 EST (# 16797 of 16804)

rshow55 - 06:24pm Nov 7, 2003 EST (# 16794 of 16795)

But I will be glad when it shuts down - so that it is finished - and I can summarize it - and use it as something finished.

Sure, I know the past 6 weeks have been quite traumatic for you.

The thread has been finished for LONG time. NYT finally realized, quite belatedly, that it needed to be interred, and we're now going through the last rites. Thanks to you and lchic, and your continued abuse !

You want to "summarize it" ONCE again ? Posters get ready for more of the same SLOP all over again.

And make some money.

Sure, why NOT ?

As long as fencing has to continue - I'll keep up my guard and go on fencing. Knife fights are rather like that.

Fencing is what YOU wanted to do -- instead of answering simple questions asked many times .

More Messages Recent Messages (7 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

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