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 (17614 previous messages)

cantabb - 08:05pm Nov 13, 2003 EST (# 17615 of 17617)

rshow55 - 06:50pm Nov 13, 2003 EST (# 17603 of 17611)

For any large scale project to work - the mechanism has to be a mixed capitalism. I couldn't imagine applying for federal funding - with the egalitarian rules there. … The political context of federal funding isn't remotely built for actually getting large scale jobs done. Not for the jobs I've been looking at, anyway.

If Federal funding is NOT “built” for large scale jobs in “Solar Energy” (one of its active programs), YOU expect NYT will have that kind of money ?

It seems you’re pursuing some other financial interest with NYT.

rshow55 - 06:58pm Nov 13, 2003 EST (# 17604 of 17611)

No contradiction at all. Raines was an excellent man - with many accomplishments - who made a big mistake..... He ran a very good company very well.

That was NOT the point. He’s an excellent newsman, but what mediation skills does he have that’ll help you ???

Contradiction is: On the one hand, Your (and lchic's) criticism of Blair affair and hitting NYT and Raines for his "big mistake" (that you now generously forgive), and asking for his help in mediation (not quite known for this skill) with NYT, which I doubt would want such close contact with him now.

Your naivete !

And if he [Howell Raines] was tapped to do an "ad hoc committee for the arrest, conviction, and crucifixion of M. Robert Showalter" level due diligence investigation of me and my technical work - employing detectives, technical consultants, the works - - he could get it done. And people would believe what he said - if he gave people ways to check what he said. Which he could, and would if asked. ( I'd ask him to do so. )

What the hell are you talking about ? You ARE now showing signs of tremendous stress !!! Took your pills today ?

If, by chance, I was "full of the old stuff" - Raines and people he could find and run could uncover the flaws soon enough.

Most of the flaws have already been uncovered right here, some in the last 58 days.

rshow55 - 07:00pm Nov 13, 2003 EST (# 17606 of 17612)

A lot of problems could be solved if I got Raines phone number - and the right introduction. Something H. L. Menken might write - applied to the case - written by Arthur Sulzberger. Not trusting. Something that asked "could you check this ? " Money for the due diligence could be found easily with a few phone calls.

Why not ask your private detectives for helkp !

rshow55 - 07:26pm Nov 13, 2003 EST (# 17612 of 17612)

In case anybody wonders - I take derogatory things said about me seriously. And unlike cantabbb and bluestar - I'm using my own name.

Remember the “derogatory things” (lying etc) you have said about me and others – and you are a known, named entity.

You guys look pretty vincible to me. . . . . .

And that was shown in the last 8 weeks, right ?

HINT: Look at your posts, now in smithereens. You’re still delusion, still in denial. That’s expected to last some more time.

Stipping off the anonymous identities of the posters would be a thing worth writing home about. . . .

What the heck you think you can do IF the identities were known ? b Personal threats and physical violence ?

Knowing “anonymous” lchic’s affiliations and sponsors would be quite interesting too. Shouldn’t be difficult.

I'd rather make a deal, of course. But fighting isn't necessarily such a bad thing, either.

Deal on what ?

When I called Apcar today, he accidentally picked up the phone and actually said something. When he heard it was me, he dropped the phone in what seemed to have been panic - and then gave me a dial tone . When I called back, I was able to get his answering machine.

He must have been shivering in his shoes and scared stiff realizing it was YOU !

Why shouldn't I fight, if I c

cantabb - 08:06pm Nov 13, 2003 EST (# 17616 of 17617)

rshow55 - 07:26pm Nov 13, 2003 EST (# 17612 of 17612)

Why shouldn't I fight, if I can't be dealt with as a human being? People thinking about peacemaking should ask such questions. Just for balance.

Do whatever you feel necessary. You’re NOT indentured. You're a free man. Don’t just talk and talk and talk about “fighting” – DO something about it; show it to NYT or whosoever you want to.

More Messages Recent Messages (1 following message)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

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