[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 (2461 previous messages)

rshow55 - 06:54am Jun 4, 2002 EST (#2462 of 2472) Delete Message

We can "collect the dots" and "connect the dots" more effectively than ever before -- and with time, and practice - both the "collection" and the "connection" can become better, and easier for people as they are. Wars of ideas can be painful, but they are better, safer, more hopeful, than wars that rend flesh, and waste lives.


If we are intent on preventing the next 9/11, we need to do more than just spy on our enemies better in secret. We need to take on their ideas in public.

The United States, and some other countries, in Europe and all over the world, are now engaged in differences of opinion, about what uses of force make practical sense, about what uses of force make moral sense, about what uses of force are possible, and about what the motivations for military establishments may be.

Things that used to be based on blind trust can now be considered in terms of things that can be checked -- so that relationships, in the future, can come to be based on trust (or distrust) that is justified.

It has become commonplace, all over the world, to ask the question -- are US military and political relationships much more reliable than the bureacratic usages of the FBI and CIA, or about the same, or perhaps worse? If they are not much more reliable, both intellectually and morally, they bear considerable checking.

Spy Game: Changing the Rules So the Good Guys Win By DAVID WISE

F.B.I. director Robert S. Mueller III says the bureau is reinventing itself to fight terrorists, but what about the Central Intelligence Agency?

Wary of Risk, Slow to Adapt, F.B.I. Stumbles in Terror War By DON VAN NATTA Jr. and DAVID JOHNSTON

Senior intelligence officials say that the F.B.I. has never developed a nimble enough structure, analytic capability or sense of mission to foil terrorist plots.

Interactive Feature: A Changing F.B.I

Egypt Warned U.S. of a Qaeda Plot, Mubarak Asserts By PATRICK E. TYLER and NEIL MacFARQUHAR

Rifts Plentiful as 9/11 Inquiry Begins Today By JAMES RISEN

The United States, and the EU countries, are now engaged in serious discussion about how much to spend on military function, and how to spend the resources involved. Specifics matter - and it would be useful for the patterns of our "missile defense" program to be checked in ways that could stand crossexamination. MD1076 rshow55 4/4/02 1:20pm . . . . If one looked at that program - carefully -- a great deal about the validity of the US military-industrial-political complex would be clarified - and Europeans and others would be clearer about what is worth spending money on -- what is worth respecting -- and what is not. The amounts of money involved should justify careful checking - not that missile defense, itself is our biggest program - MD1318 rshow55 4/12/02 6:59pm ... but it is big enough to illustrate some key issues about the "culture" that Eisenhower worried about - a culture that has continued, with surprisingly little supervision, for the last fifty years. (Eisenhower's FAREWELL ADDRESS of January 17, 1961 . . . MD2286 rshow55 5/18/02 5:44pm)

rshow55 - 06:55am Jun 4, 2002 EST (#2463 of 2472) Delete Message

As Krugman points out, things can and do get worse - when time passes, and honor erodes:


Perhaps corporations will reform themselves, but so far they show no signs of changing their ways.

Checking is important, and both Americans, and others who have a stake in the decency and survival of the world, should ask for it. When President Bush and others emphasize the virtues of morality, transparency, and honesty, they are right to do so.

lchic - 02:33pm Jun 4, 2002 EST (#2464 of 2472)

Enron : BBC June4

lchic - 11:15pm Jun 4, 2002 EST (#2465 of 2472)

GU thread International

nukes (who controls Israel's 'redbutton'?)

In an article titled "The American Snake," Kamal Sa'ad, a columnist for the Egyptian opposition weekly Al-Usbu', attacked U.S. National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice

Elaborate language may have roots in (pre-soap) story telling, but, how do the regular folks 'uncurl' the descriptiveness to get a clearEnglish, straight, point by point view of factual matters .. or is life forever hazy in some cultures ?

More Messages Recent Messages (7 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  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