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 (17441 previous messages)

bluestar23 - 07:14pm Nov 12, 2003 EST (# 17442 of 17479)

After three whole years, it's amazing to watch Showalter let everyone down, including himself...he has not one original or thought-provoking comment to make on his tens of thousands of posts....nothing...except to say he'll now start "summarizing" on guardian thread, where he is free from problems....all of his posts, an unconcluded and unremarked upon mess, even by himself....

cantabb - 07:25pm Nov 12, 2003 EST (# 17443 of 17479)

I don't think debating with them gets you anywhere (a few posters have tried and gave up), but I think asking them questions and demanding answers tend to unnerve them and their theories etc begin to unravel faster than you can say "connect-the-dots."

rshow55 - 07:26pm Nov 12, 2003 EST (# 17444 of 17479)
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.

My main thought, now, is that I'll be glad the thread is ended . So I can go on.

I'm not in a hurry to post things that are going to be covered up. There were about 150 posts yesterday.

bbbuck - 07:30pm Nov 12, 2003 EST (# 17445 of 17479)

showalter cd's will be available at the picnic.

aol 9.0 cd's will also be offered.

rita hayworth " I've made a lot of mistakes"

"you mean we can't win?"

Orson: "Well we can't lose either"

Rita: "I don't want to die!"

Orson:"Everybody is somebody's fool"

Lady from Shanghai

cantabb - 07:30pm Nov 12, 2003 EST (# 17446 of 17479)

rshow55 - 07:26pm Nov 12, 2003 EST (# 17444 of 17444)

My main thought, now, is that I'll be glad the thread is ended . So I can go on.

Sure, I can understand how you must feel. That's why I likened it to euthanasia.

A "graceful" way to go, I think.

I'm not in a hurry to post things that are going to be covered up. There were about 150 posts yesterday.

Wise decision. Glad you saw the light ...

maclab - 08:14pm Nov 12, 2003 EST (# 17447 of 17479)

Mutual Nuclear Deterrence also known as Civil Deterrence is the best technology we have to prevent International Wars. However, such technology is bad for war industry profiteers, bad for war based economies, and bad for imperial minded government administraitors. Thus the military industrialist "Brain Child"- The Anti Nuclear Proliferation Movement-

There are three civilized uses for nuclear energy, Energy generation, Medicine, and Nuclear Deterrents.

Mutual Nuclear Deterrence... works, this can be proven wrong, but so far it hasn't and in my opinion not likely to.

When a country, fearing other countries, obtains just a few highly accurate Nuclear missiles they achieve ABSOLUTE Deterrence.

A country with 3 or 4 such deterrent weapons can deter a country with thousands of such weapons.. Thus a deterrence parity is accomplished.

NUKES are far less costly than conventional War technologies... thus the dislike of them by war industry profitters and Imperial minded Administraitors.

As a civilian I would prefer that my country was deterred from starting international wars! Even if was not good for Wall Street!

These are they who when the saving thought came, shot it for a spy!

bluestar23 - 08:16pm Nov 12, 2003 EST (# 17448 of 17479)

By rshow55 refusing to even deal with the issues and "work" of his tens of thousands of posts , through usual excuses..."I'm in no hurrry"...posts would be "covered up" ...like a three-year-old....

It all shows, more clearly than anything could, that behind these endless posts, like the Wizard of Oz, is ....nothing, there's really "nothing" to defend, to talk about....all of Showalter's posts were for nothing at all....

maclab - 08:16pm Nov 12, 2003 EST (# 17449 of 17479)

The US has declared War on Mutual Nuclear Deterrance!

More Messages Recent Messages (30 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

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