[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 (2187 previous messages)

rshow55 - 11:45am May 13, 2002 EST (#2188 of 2201) Delete Message

Bush Announces a Nuclear Pact With Russia to Reduce Warheads By TERENCE NEILAN

"President Bush announced today that the United States and Russia had agreed on a treaty to reduce their nuclear arsenals to between 1,700 and 2,000 warheads each, and that he would sign the pact on a trip to Moscow later this month.

""This treaty will liquidate the legacy of the cold war," he said outside the White House before leaving on a visit to Chicago.

""This is good news for the American people today," he went on. "It'll make the world more peaceful and put behind us the cold war once and for all."

Comment: I feel there will have to be more to it than that. Moreover, even if nukes were the only issue, 1700-2000 warheads is a LOT. The Russians have talked about 100's or none, if other details could be worked out.

"Mr. Bush is scheduled to meet with President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia when he visits Moscow from May 23-26.

"Mr. Putin said Monday that he was happy with the deal.

""We are satisfied with our joint work," Mr. Putin said.

""When I sign the treaty with President Putin in Russia, we will begin the new era of U.S.-Russian relationships, and that's important," Mr. Bush said. "The new era will be a period of enhanced mutual security, economic security and improved relations."

"Final agreement on the treaty was reached Monday morning by American and Russian negotiators in Moscow.

"Sean McCormack, told reporters.

"Sean McCormack, the national security council spokesman, told reporters that the two sides had agreed on a formal treaty, sought by Mr. Putin, while Mr. Bush had pursued a less formal agreement. A treaty will require ratification by the Senate.

"The White House spokesman Ari Fleischer was quoted by Reuters as saying that under the new agreement each country's arsenals, now standing at roughly 6,000 warheads apiece, would be reduced through putting some weapons in storage and dismantling others.

"Russia had opposed the storage provision.

. . . .

I don't know if this thread has helped, but people working here have tried to be constructive. MD2000 rshow55 5/4/02 10:39am

mazza9 - 11:55am May 13, 2002 EST (#2189 of 2201)
Louis Mazza


What did Sen Dirksen say, "A billion her and a billion there and soon it begins to add up!" Well, a thousand here and a thousand there and soon we've elminiated those "beasties".

Re my post on OTECs et al I LUF YOU!

Pardon the pun.


rshow55 - 02:24pm May 13, 2002 EST (#2190 of 2201) Delete Message

Bush Announces a Nuclear Pact With Russia to Reduce Warheads by MICHAEL WINES

Ivanov's positions are notable, including the one at the end of the piece:

``Life's relationship cannot be changed overnight by an order of a certain person who says the cold war is over,'' Mr. Ivanov said. ``There are still people who have their old ideas.''

Persuasion, and checking , matter a great deal. MD382 rshow55 3/11/02 1:13pm

Russia's contact with NATO is getting closer in form. It will be closer in substance as well, to the extent that Russia, and other nations in NATO - (not just the United States) can communicate and check things that actually matter - and a great deal matters. That need for checking goes against established patterns - some shown, in a very clear way in the NUNN-WOLFOWITZ TASK FORCE REPORT: INDUSTRY "BEST PRACTICES" REGARDING EXPORT COMPLIANCE PROGRAMS July 25, 2000 ... . This is a treatise on restricting conversation. In current situations, to make the cold war over in reality, we have to do just the opposite. We have to have enough conversation, and enough real checking, for reasonable trust to be justified. And enough so that real cooperation can occur.

lchic - 03:22pm May 13, 2002 EST (#2191 of 2201)

"" between 1,700 and 2,000 warheads each

I would have thought a 1:4 ratio would look more proactively real, on Am's part than a mere 1:1 ... USA doesn't look to be trying - not at all!

lchic - 03:31pm May 13, 2002 EST (#2192 of 2201)

Showalter: Our mob are inventive
Even so the USA most often gets the inventions -- innovation development is capital intensive.
Just a reminder that the wealth of the USA is built on the backs of the rest of the world. The irksome thing is the USA then go on to call many inventions - their own.

lchic - 03:38pm May 13, 2002 EST (#2193 of 2201)

GU - RU ~~ CU (Carter),2763,714898,00.html,6729,714876,00.html

lchic - 03:39pm May 13, 2002 EST (#2194 of 2201)

Bushie - don't pay mAzzA for above post - dock his pay cheque!

mazza9 - 03:41pm May 13, 2002 EST (#2195 of 2201)
Louis Mazza



But I suppose you are too ignorant to understand that the device you spew your filth into is ALL AMERICAN!



More Messages Recent Messages (6 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Email to Sysop  Your Preferences

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

Home | Site Index | Site Search | Forums | Archives | Shopping

News | Business | International | National | New York Region | NYT Front Page | Obituaries | Politics | Quick News | Sports | Science | Technology/Internet | Weather
Editorial | Op-Ed

Features | Arts | Automobiles | Books | Cartoons | Crossword | Games | Job Market | Living | Magazine | Real Estate | Travel | Week in Review

Help/Feedback | Classifieds | Services | New York Today

Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company