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 - 06:15pm Sep 13, 2002 EST (# 4297 of 4307)
Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES. Click "rshow55" for some things Lchic and I have done and worked for on this thread.

Here's part of an undelivered speech by Franklin D. Roosevelt, written shortly before his death:

" Today, we are faced with the pre-eminent fact that, if civilization is to survive, we must cultivate the science of human relationships --- the ability of all peoples, of all kinds, to live together and work together in the same world, at peace."

This quote was on the last page of the American Heritage Picture History of World War II , by C.L. Sulzberger and the editors of American Heritage , published in 1966.

Sometimes, for unavoidable reasons - that will require us to learn to acknowledge some shared facts. Human relationships, often enough, cannot be peacefully sustained without them.

When all the Iraqis can do is shout "liar" - - without sensible details -- they are cornered - not only militarily, but logically and morally, too -- and their leaders are worthy of little respect. The Iraqis signed an agreement renouncing weapons of mass destruction - - the whole world supported that agreement -- and they should be held to it.

The Bush administration should be held to some agreements, too. Americans should insist on it. So should people of other nations. But it is not only the Bush administration that needs to deal on the basis of the truth - especially when the truth can be checked, focused, and determined beyond a decent doubt.

Again, I think lchic 9/12/02 9:21pm is brilliant, and I'm going to respond later in detail.

rshow55 - 07:34pm Sep 13, 2002 EST (# 4298 of 4307)
Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES. Click "rshow55" for some things Lchic and I have done and worked for on this thread.

Democrats Push to Slow Vote on U.S. Force in Iraq By REUTERS http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/politics/politics-iraq-usa-congress.html

President Bush, under every pressure to do so, gave no evidence that time was pressing enough to shut off fact finding, debate, and consideration by the American people in an election.

There is time to consider facts -- and for the U.N. to consider options, as well. To short circuit that would damage the credibility of the United States all over the world.

If the United States "plays games" and denies time and resources to consider facts and context, and to deliberate - - it weakens its case. Interdiction, and unlateral action are last resorts .

There are reasons to take care - and listen to credible voices. Some arguing from morality - - The Troubling New Face of America By Jimmy Carter http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A38441-2002Sep4.html . . . and some making practical arguments that concentration on Saddam, for now, is counterproductive Where Iraq Fits in the War on Terror By MADELEINE K. ALBRIGHT http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/13/opinion/13ALBR.html

If everything is a squeeze play - if the Bush administration argues implicitly, as it argues on missile defense -- "forget the facts - forget looking at details -- we have the votes, and only that matters" -- how can it reasonably ask others to hold to a higher standard?

mazza9 - 09:34pm Sep 13, 2002 EST (# 4299 of 4307)
"Quae cum ita sunt" Caesar's Gallic Commentaries

Lest we forget, the United Nations was a United States formulation. The League of Nations was also a United States institution which failed because, at the time, Europe wasn't ready to give up its imperial/colonial ways.

Yes Robert, the people of the United States have imperfections. Our governmental construction and legal institutions accept this fact.

I would be careful when referring to or quoting Secretary Albright. The wrong person at the wrong time to be dealing with the problems of the Middle East. For crying out loud she's a women. Read Schwartzkopf's book and see how he was able to interact with the Saudis because he had diplomatic experiences with the Muslim world. Albright had no standing in any Muslim Man's world and her presence was counter productive. Plus she was only as perceptive as her boss who was/is a doofus.

(8 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense