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 (17526 previous messages)

rshow55 - 12:51pm Nov 13, 2003 EST (# 17527 of 17532)
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.

If someone with high influence at the paper doesn't know it - then the judgement that people expect and trust in a paper that sets itself up as supplying

"All the news that's fit to print"

is badly in need of some basic education.

To judge fitness - sensitivity to everything involved in the question

" Why are people so concerned what anyone would say about them (without their knowledge) ? "

has to be assumed - because that sensitivity is fundamental to any decent judgement of fitness.

http://www.mrshowalter.net/jorian319_Mar20_May26_2003_WrittenOut.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/Jorian319_May30_toOc9_2003.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/JorianOnGuardian.htm

lchic - 12:52pm Nov 13, 2003 EST (# 17528 of 17532)
ultimately TRUTH outs : TRUTH has to be morally forcing : build on TRUTH it's a strong foundation

From a 'management' stance the Blair-Flare indicates a failure to appreciate what should be expected from an employee in a set time period ....

Blair was issuing 'output' to demand

NYT fell down in the 'quality' stakes ... because ...

  • there was an assumption that professionals follow a code
  • there was no 'personal' interaction with seniors
  • there was a lack of realism regarding the time required to do a job - to professional standards .... a failure to appreciate the process - the stages - the checking and re-checking

    Take the Cantabbulator --- an echo -- a process ....

    BIG on the

    small

    small

    on the BIG

    ----

    ----

    lchic - 01:06pm Nov 13, 2003 EST (# 17529 of 17532)
    ultimately TRUTH outs : TRUTH has to be morally forcing : build on TRUTH it's a strong foundation

    Shavian

    1909 How to Write a Popular Playš an essay by: George Bernard Shaw

    lchic - 01:12pm Nov 13, 2003 EST (# 17530 of 17532)
    ultimately TRUTH outs : TRUTH has to be morally forcing : build on TRUTH it's a strong foundation

    " the principals must all be dukes and colonels and millionaires "

    Shaw (1909)

    --------

    ... the more things change .... the more they stay the same

    More Messages Recent Messages (2 following messages)

     Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
     Your Preferences

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