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.

cantabb - 12:51pm Nov 12, 2003 EST (# 17403 of 17416)

to rshow55: cont'd with overlap...

Mere verbiage. Besides, I think you’re reversing yourself (see what you said earlier): “ To get to an initial focus where there is a chance for mutual accomodation - where people know enough - highly ambiguous statements, disjointed thoughts/logic - "paranoia-driven speculations" and irrationality are just what you need.” [statemenmt yours, quotated parts mine]

IF and when, YOU can “do a better job of finding truth,” come back to discuss things.

cantabb - 12:57pm Nov 12, 2003 EST (# 17404 of 17416)

rshow55 - 11:50am Nov 12, 2003 EST (# 17399 of 17401)

But I was trying to take a little time to write a couple of emails - maybe three - to Sulzberger, Apcar, and manj.

Do it then. Who’s preventing you?

But I've been trying to explain about convergent sequences in natural language - and how they connect ( and are disconnected ) from pictures, math, and technical specification. Plus come up with a few check lists.

And, so far you’ve made NO sense whatsoever.

So folks could take the incidence of injury and death way down - - and I might collect some back pay, maybe.

Go ahead, collect what’s due. Do we really need to know all this ?

rshow55 - 11:57am Nov 12, 2003 EST (# 17400 of 17401)

How many more time are you going to post this garbled stuff.

For something that takes up a lot of life - there are many purposes - many missions - that have to be handled in turn. …...

Lchic and I have intended for this thread to be, (or prototype) the largest bandwidth, clearest line of political-military communication that has ever existed between the US and Russia.

Who are you and lchic to try to re-cast any thread (NOT yours) ? How can you two do anything about you “have intended it to” for a thread NOT yours? A “Mission Statement” for a thread, NOT yours. What chutzpah !

Another re-hash dismissed as meaningless before.

rshow55 - 12:00pm Nov 12, 2003 EST (# 17401 of 17401)

We've also been trying, since September 2000 - to find ways to get me out of a set of restrictions that have made it essentially impossible to work - a condition that I've been calling "house arrest" - and into a situation where I could work . Sometimes "It is easier to get forgiveness than it is to get permission" .

With your paranoia and your so-called ‘negotiating’ skills ? And all those fact-free claims, and ambiguous generalities ? Am still surprised why were you NOT banned completely from NYT forums 3+ years ago. That would have saved the forum community of putting up with your abuse of posting privileges and much senselessness for 3+ years ?

To accomplish all these objectives - and as an objective in itself - we've worked to communicate - and sometimes challenge - people and institutions with power - including the people who influence the powerful institution that is The New York Times.

That’s you may wish to think. Hardly the reality, unfolded in the last 8 weeks.

Have we failed at everything ? Well, anyway, we've tried. We both try to be entertaining , too.

STILL unaware of what in the world were you two trying to do, ALL I can say is: Hope you’ve learned something, at least since Sept 17.

Good luck in your next venture.

lchic - 02:40pm Nov 12, 2003 EST (# 17405 of 17416)
ultimately TRUTH outs : TRUTH has to be morally forcing : build on TRUTH it's a strong foundation

Using cantabb logic there are so many possibilities and combinations below -- no one can understand 'what he means' ....

Cantabbulator - what do you mean by - 'Good luck in your next venture'

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=good

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=luck

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=in

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=your%20

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=next

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=venture%20

lchic - 02:53pm Nov 12, 2003 EST (# 17406 of 17416)
ultimately TRUTH outs : TRUTH has to be morally forcing : build on TRUTH it's a strong foundation

Showalter's use of 'common ground' wrt language - and people being able to talk because they have words, phrases, meanings in common .... is lost on Cantabb.

Cantabb additionally can't distinguish 'the general' as against 'the particular'.

(10 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense