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.

rshow55 - 09:20pm Aug 1, 2002 EST (#3408 of 3420)

A time comes when things are so complicated that the only possible hope requires people to find and face facts.

For example, with respect to Iraq, if I'm standing against some things that Rumsfeld, Bush, and Rice are passionate for - - I'm not so far from the concerns of many professional soldiers - including some of the joint chiefs.

If we overturn Saddam, without thinking about an end game -- we're being stupid, and the whole world knows it.

And if we had an end game for Iraq - we'd find a stable, just solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict easily.

Because it is an easier problem.

To solve the problems involved, both the Israelis and the Palestinians would have to determine and face some key facts -- some of them embarrassing.

We can't ask them to - or help them to -- when we can't face basic facts ourselves.

That's becoming increasingly clear, with the whole world watching.

There are some basic problems, and if we ask others to face theirs, we have to face some of ours. Mankind's Inhumanity to Man and Woman - As natural as human goodness? http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7b085/150 #122-125

If the US wanted to get world support toward ridding the world of weapons of mass destruction in "irresponsible hands" -- how about getting rid of most of OUR weapons of mass destruction, and the tactics that depend on them.

If we did that, we might find a lot more support.

lchic - 09:27pm Aug 1, 2002 EST (#3409 of 3420)

When 'neighbours' have problems - often there are economic, legal and social injustices

When these are resolved to equity there can be prolonged peace.

rshow55 - 09:29pm Aug 1, 2002 EST (#3410 of 3420)

Equity, with enough feedback (and that means some checking, and some distrust) so that things are stable.

rshow55 - 09:33pm Aug 1, 2002 EST (#3411 of 3420)

MD1595 rshow55 4/21/02 3:11pm includes this:

" The day after kate_nyt "Favorite Poetry (Archived)" 9/24/00 1:27pm assigned me to the Missile Defense thread I had an all-day web session with becq , who I then believed, and still suspect, was William Jefferson Clinton.

"I began that session with a short statement, and post that statement here, with the beginnings of conversation with becq - - and the end of the web session about ten hours later.

"I still think the proposal is valid as far as it goes, but very incomplete, due to things pointed out by almarst and others. But I believe that postings #266-269 make the right points about the need to acknowlege distrust, and ways that distrust is reasonable, and can be reasonably accomodated.

Postings #266-299 also make points that would justify getting rid of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction if we got rid of our own . Might be widely supported.

#266-269 were an assignment from Casy -- and deal with a gap at the end of a recent movie The Sum of All Fears . They address the question -

"How could you get rid or nukes, even if you wanted to?

The answer is that you have to acknowledge reasonable distrust in a humane way. There is no workable alternative.

out.

lchic - 09:35pm Aug 1, 2002 EST (#3412 of 3420)

Equity within peaceful environs has to be the future.

The reality is there are now so many 'toys of war' that can be planted and remotely switched ... that people have got to learn to 'heal' divisions quickly and smoothly with that win-win in mind.

Remote anger can all too soon become 'upFront and Personal' in horrible lasting ways.

lchic - 09:41pm Aug 1, 2002 EST (#3413 of 3420)

'Still wondering why these 17 posts - some constructively critical of UncleSam - were deleted
^{rshow55 8/1/02 8:48pm}

lchic - 04:59am Aug 2, 2002 EST (#3414 of 3420)

"" In a move that took the international community by surprise, Iraq has invited the chief United Nations weapons inspector to Baghdad for technical talks, it emerged last night. The US government, which has been debating the possibility of an invasion of Iraq this week, had no immediate response ...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,768002,00.html

kalter.rauch - 05:26am Aug 2, 2002 EST (#3415 of 3420)
Earth vs <^> <^> <^>

lchic 8/2/02 4:59am

...Iraq has invited...

You unmitigated AIRHEAD!!! You're splitting hairs over Geneva Convention Protocols regarding "Camp X-ray", and now you're touting the "statesmanship" of The Butcher of Baghdad!!!

You might as well be Lady Godiva, given the THIN veneer of legitimacy cloaking your "points"!!!

(5 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense