[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 (2985 previous messages)

rshow55 - 03:58pm Jul 10, 2002 EST (#2986 of 3052) Delete Message

Personally, I want to establish facts well enough that I can, and do, get a fair resolution of the matters treated in "Verbal deal between M. Robert Showalter and William J. Casey for Showalter's work situation . . ." MD2770 rshow55 6/29/02 7:59am . . . especially a resolution that pays off the A.E.A. investors, who were innocent bystanders.

My interests in doing this are clear, but there are public interests, too. Doing this would illustrate, on a tangible basis - "with real chips" what evidence and logic are and are not good for, and what "proof" is, within the real limitations of the human condition. Everything important about human logic, as it works when it works well for individuals or groups - would have to be made reasonably clear in this process - - - the "collection, connection, and correction of "the dots."

People have been doing all these things for millions of years -- but they can do them somewhat more clearly, more safely, and more reliably. It is worthwhile getting clear how well "connecting the dots" works. It works well enough that a great deal of predatory and evasive behavior now not reasonably controlled should become more comfortably controllable.

50K might not get things to a settlement here -- but if it didn't -- it would get things to a point where a lawsuit could and would be funded.

There are many ways this matter could be resolved that would work well - subject to the stability constraints set out in Berle's Laws of Power, Maslow's Heirarchy of Needs, and the Golden Rule - - I think the effort would be a good example, and would go some way towards working out what ought to be done to deal with the concerns expressed by Eisenhower in his Farewell Address

MD2541 rshow55 6/15/02 8:37am

rshow55 - 04:14pm Jul 10, 2002 EST (#2987 of 3052) Delete Message

I think that real rates of economic growth could be much higher than today, and human and environmental costs less - - but perhaps I'm wrong about that. If my debriefing went well enough that lchic felt comfortable - I think that this could be worked out if a Harvard professor, married to a Phud, and Krugman got people together who could corner me. My idea is that we'd hashed out what sustainable growth would actually take. In spots, some people would have to do some innovation - that they could then get put into place in the economy in a coordinated and planned way.

Maybe market chaos is better than planning most of the time, but not always.

Maybe we couldn't "sell" this approach to the Bush administration - but Putin, and some European leaders might take an interest.

rshow55 - 04:17pm Jul 10, 2002 EST (#2988 of 3052) Delete Message

I'd like to work on the question . . . "How is it possible to make investors more comfortable on a rational basis that the people involved can understand and explain?"

Edison always hoped that, with hard thought and labor, he'd finally come up with the "perfectly obvious" solution to his problems. We need something like that here.

lchic - 04:42pm Jul 10, 2002 EST (#2989 of 3052)

Showalter you refer to Edison often - did his work impress?

rshow55 - 04:47pm Jul 10, 2002 EST (#2990 of 3052) Delete Message

Edison wanted to make breakthrough invention routine - - and in large part was able to do that - in his place and time. I've tried to build on that.

rshow55 - 04:52pm Jul 10, 2002 EST (#2991 of 3052) Delete Message

I feel like taking a walk, around the U.W. Madison area, and see if I can talk with my best U.W. contact. It seems to me that if I could get some simple, reasonable things worked out with UW, as far as contact goes - a lot might happen safely and comfortably.

If the UW was really comfortable that I was proceeding in a reasonable, fair way, consistent with the interest of the UW as well as my own - and a few other people I know were, too -- my guess is that I could get the money for a good debriefing. A distinguished man with great achievements in the movie and food business runs the foundation I'd contact first - but there are others.

It seems to me that with just a little flexibility in a few spots (not basic changes of the rules, just a little exception handling) - - some problems that I've been bothering this board about might be worked out.

rshow55 - 07:39pm Jul 10, 2002 EST (#2992 of 3052) Delete Message

Pretty good day. Knocking off, and having a beer. This board is windy and long sometimes. But it seems to me that sometimes, after a lot of words, simple things jell that are worthwhile.

I hope the market goes up tomorrow, and think maybe it ought to.

lchic - 08:38pm Jul 10, 2002 EST (#2993 of 3052)

Holding back the tide
Turning back time

  • past
  • present
  • future
    - China,7369,752802,00.html

More Messages Recent Messages (59 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