New York Times on the Web Forums Science
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
(2688 previous messages)
- 10:59pm Jun 22, 2002 EST (#2689
Bush/The Observer "" ... rebuff spoke volumes to columnists
and Washington DC observers about the clueless, crassly selfish
quality of a President and a presidency which are suddenly lurching,
rather than governing, at the apex of American power. ... behind the
stage set a mesh of policy snags, befuddled contradictions and
scandals threatens to ensnare a President whose shortcomings are not
only being targeted by his opponents, but felt by many of those who
serve under and stage-manage him ... Americans who propelled his
candidature and elected him into office now worry about - and do not
trust - their President. .... http://www.observer.co.uk/worldview/story/0,11581,742399,00.html
- 06:12am Jun 23, 2002 EST (#2690
Working for good :
- 08:46am Jun 23, 2002 EST (#2691
"" ... it only took an Israeli shell fired into a crowded
Palestinian market another of those famous Israeli "errors" to
shut Bush up again ... ""
Robert Fisk: Fatal vision: how Bush has given up on peace
A vacillating President and lack of a credible plan is fuelling
hatred in the Middle East
see also 'lunatic war'
- 05:07pm Jun 23, 2002 EST (#2692
Assessing Watergate 30 Years Later By RICHARD REEVES http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/23/opinion/23REEV.html
"Watergate was not just a burglary. It was not
about personal finances like Whitewater. It was not about a
president's knowledge of clandestine foreign operations as in the
U-2 affair or Iran-contra. Watergate was a clandestine domestic
operation in which a determined president secretly plotted what
amounted to a coup d'ιtat against American constitutional
"The real story and lessons of Watergate are in
peril of being lost or forgotten. Thirty years of research,
scholarship and confession millions of documents, thousands of
tapes have made it perfectly clear that the botched break-in of
June 17, 1972, at the Democratic National Committee offices was
actually a small incident in Nixon's deliberate, if sometimes
clumsy, effort to secretly create a new kind of all-powerful
presidential government that reflected his own contempt for
democracy and for the Constitution's checks and balances designed
to restrict the power of presidents.
. . . . .
"He operated behind screens of secrets and layer
upon layer of lies, big and small, a strategy that worked in his
first term. Nixon was able to make great decisions, world-changing
decisions, without the advice or interference of Congress, the
courts, the federal bureaucracy, the press and certainly without
the knowledge or consent of the governed.
" . . . . Nixon had learned to govern by surprise.
. . . . . But surprise in the American system required enormous
secrecy. Protecting the secrecy required lies so many that some
of the most important officials of the country had no idea what
the truth was and neither, it could be argued, did Nixon at the
end. By then the military was tapping White House telephones
and sending its own operatives to the building at night to empty
wastebaskets, steal documents and photograph National Security
"The baffles of deceptions began not with a
burglary, but with a murder in June 1969. Nixon dictated lies
to the Central Intelligence Agency to prevent the court-martial of
six Green Berets for murdering one of their own spies. It
happened that the man, Thai Khac Chuyen, was involved in target
selection and damage evaluation for secret bombing in Cambodia.
Any legal process would have revealed the bombing, which was being
kept secret from Congress and the public by phony Air Force
record-keeping ordered by the president.
"A year later, Nixon approved a secret plan, the
so-called Huston Plan, authorizing domestic electronic
surveillance and lifting restrictions on surreptitious entry. He
had to back down on that plan because the F.B.I. director, J.
Edgar Hoover, refused to cooperate, saying the press or Congress
would eventually discover what was happening.
" . . . . "But Watergate was unique as the
climax of a presidency that believed that governance required lies
and deception. Though Nixon was pardoned, his legacy was the
destruction of American faith in government and its elected
leaders. And that not the heroics of the press is what should
be remembered about the episode called Watergate.
The last thing we need again is a "destruction of American faith
in government and its elected leaders." As Americans, we need to
deal with, and to judge our government and our elected leaders with
limited trust and wariness -- some distrust, as the
founding fathers clearly intended. Faith and judgement have to go
together. There is no contradiction - there needs to be
judgement. Balance. With the Cold War, much of that was thrown away.
We need to get it back.
Were Nixon's horrors unique? No. The way we fought to Cold War,
and perhaps the way we had to (the way we felt we had to) required
enormous secrecy. An all pervasive feeling, that very much
influenced McNamara, that nuclear
New York Times on the Web Forums Science