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 - 06:55pm Aug 10, 2002 EST (#3621 of 3637)

If I was free of security limitations - or had clear limitations, and that was in writing, or otherwise clearly checkable then I could interact with people in workable ways - for collaborations and business relationships that fit real needs, in real circumstances.

I need workable answers to both the following questions:

. . . How can I pay you enough?

...... How can I thank you enough?

for both, I need workable credentialing. Credentialing that may be limited, but that does not confront people with unacceptable conflicts and risks.

Example: The Missile Defense Archive CD disk - as "sample and credentials." 3145 rshowalt 7/19/02 9:16am ... 3146 rshowalt 7/19/02 9:19am
3147 rshowalt 7/19/02 9:24am ... 3148 rshowalt 7/19/02 10:34am

So far, the CIA has not been prepared to say, in writing, that my work is free from security constraints - though a person who I later find out "is not on the payroll" assured me of this verbally. I have every reason to get that matter more resolved - in terms of priorities that matter to me, and that I think Bill Casey would approve of:

Priority ordering for me: National interest . . . NYT interest . . scientific community interest . . . U.W. interest . . . my own interest.

I come last in priority, but I matter, too.

It seems right for me to send an archive of this thread to the major news organizations of the world - not only ones in America - but ones in other countries, as well. It also seems right to me to send this information to representatives of other nation states who may have an interest in the subject matter.

And also to some other interested parties. If CIA doesn't moniter this thread, and doesn't care about my output, there should be no objection. And if CIA does care -- they've had a good deal of time to call me and ask for other arrangements. I'd listen hard to anything they ask for.

If CIA has "no interest" in my work, as they've told me, that should be acceptable. And desireable for me, and for the people who might want to consider working with me if that can be done without unreasonable risk. After the information is distributed so widely, concerns about "classification" should be less than before.

I'm finding it tough to organize all the material involved (including 300 searches, and much other material) in ways that organizations can reasonably use. I'm finding it tough to organize press releases -- including a single page subject to the standard WWWWWH tests. I'm also working to meet the standard tests for newsworthyness - consequence -- interest -- timeliness -- proximity -- and prominance from an audience's point of view. I'm working hard doing it, and making some headway.

Operational Fact:

If I can't get debriefed by the government - I have strong reasons to try to get foundation funding so that I can be debriefed on a private basis. Work on NYT forums - especially the Missile Defense forum -- offers a coordinated and extensive body of checkable points.

I want to get the AEA investors paid as they should be, and back pay for myself if that can be arranged. I feel justified in pursuing this. I believe that this would serve the broad interests of the United States of America, not only that of the financially interested parties.

I think my needs can be served well, meeting the needs of others as well. But I'm finding it a lot of work. And perhaps going a little more slowly than I'd wish - because of fears that some other people may share. Investigating the Investigators

mazza9 - 08:15pm Aug 10, 2002 EST (#3622 of 3637)
"Quae cum ita sunt" Caesar's Gallic Commentaries

Been busy. Just what do you propose to do to FORCE me to do whatever? My, my, the ape in "2001" who wins the muddy waterhole with the thigh bone of an ass! Or is it a jawbone?

I'm amazed at the lengths which you go to vis a vis bellicose discourse. In your opinion I'M pernicious? When have I ever threatened you with force? For Christ's sake this is a forum a chat room t the NYTimes! I visit here to offer my opinions and they're not worth much, but your ravings are about as cogent as that bucket of warm spit that John Nance Garner referred to when describing the impact of the Vice President of the United States on national issues. You're no vice anything. Maybe you can build a missile and fire it at Garland Texas. Your true clors are showing. PEACE through FORCE! You know the SAC motto was "Peace is our Profession." But SAC acknowledged that war was their game.

LouMazza

rshow55 - 08:19pm Aug 10, 2002 EST (#3623 of 3637)

Some facts have to be checked -- and dealing with the likes of you -- there are times when there has to be force.

You can tell any lie at all and say - - "why not?"

And I think you've been stunningly dishonest, again and again and again.

mazza9 - 09:32pm Aug 10, 2002 EST (#3624 of 3637)
"Quae cum ita sunt" Caesar's Gallic Commentaries

It's interesting how force is so easily justified. It is your mindset that is a barrier to civil discourse, compromise and advancement. Do what I say or I'll force you. Is this intellectual rape?

Every crazy from Genghas Khan to Robert Showalter espouses this methodology. I was brought up different.

LouMazza

mazza9 - 11:21pm Aug 10, 2002 EST (#3625 of 3637)
"Quae cum ita sunt" Caesar's Gallic Commentaries

WRCooper:

Bow and Arrow update. It appears that Marvin and his raygun are coming closer every day.

PHASERS ON STUN?

LouMazza

(12 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense