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.

gisterme - 07:35pm Oct 2, 2002 EST (# 4712 of 4720)

almarst2002 10/2/02 2:00pm

"One could wonder, what this was done for?..."

According to the article, Alex, Iraq claimed there were legetimate medical research purposes for the strains delivered. That was a lie, of course. As the article says, that was a naieve thing to do. We live and we learn and we will undoubtedly pay the price for that mistake. The sudden and mysterious appearance of the West Nile virus in the US may be partial payment.

"... And wasn't it against the law of WMD non-proliferation, the US is officially ready to go to war for against any country in a world which does not declare its loyalty to the stars-and-stripes ?

Naa. It wasn't illegal at the time. That Iraq had good intentions for the use of the strains delivered was a lie, one that was stupidly believed by the CDC. All the CDC are interested in is helping to eradicate disease wherever it may occur in the world.

If a declaration of loyalty to the stars-and-stripes is a criteria for not being attacked by the United States, then there are plenty of other places that better watch out. Of course your conclusion is nonsense.

The reason that Iraq may be attacked is twofold. Firstly, in my opinion, Iraq has covertly funded and otherwise aided and abetted the worldwide terrorist movement to the extent that it has become a threat to the domestic tranquility of the US and the rest of the world (free or not). Secondly, while so doing, Iraq has refused to abide by the UN resolutions it agreed to at the end of the Gulf War concerning development of WMD. Why would Iraq do that while causing great expense and harm to it's own people if it did not intend harm to others? Perhaps you can enlighten me on that, Almarst.

We need a ballistic missile defense exactly because Iraq has been working hard to acquire/develop long range ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear warheads. They are also working hard on begging, borrowing or stealing the means to build nuclear warheads.

Saddam has both the motive and resources to join the millions-dead dictator club that he seems to aspire to. Stalin is his idol.

You connect the dots, Alrmarst. Seems pretty simple to me.

rshow55 - 08:28pm Oct 2, 2002 EST (# 4713 of 4720)
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.

Yesterday I wondered

Perhaps my duty now is to see that the swords in question become obsolete ?

Anybody object? I'm in the Madison phone book. rshow55 10/1/02 6:52pm

So far, no one has objected. Gisterme , with a chance to object, did not do so.

Perhaps if I were more free to speak to others - some things would be easier. I am feeling freer as time passes.

Links to CIA and my security problems, this thread: 3774-3779 rshow55 8/17/02 5:58pm

On issues that relate to engineering - - ideas don't have to be especially new - if they are solid. For a long time, gisterme and I discussed the issues and procedures set out in 1075-6 rshow55 4/4/02 1:20pm

With just a little facilitation - some key issues could become clear . - - - mainly this one - that the "missile defense" program is a technical fraud - or, speaking more kindly - pork, impure and simple - and misleadingly portrayed.

A lot of technical detail on "missile defense" has been set out in this thread - much referenced in MD84 rshow55 3/2/02 11:52am . . . . and I'm hard put to find any reason to think that the program is anything but a total waste.

Everything that matters could be expained, and explained clearly - to people who have the sophisication that it takes to appreciate NASCAR. I don't think NASCAR fans like to be misled, lied to, betrayed any more than anybody else.

To defend the country effectively, technology has to work.

lchic - 08:30pm Oct 2, 2002 EST (# 4714 of 4720)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Showalter you omitted the 't' in 'mis ake' ... as Ms Ache, the pedantic, pointed out - but should you be wrapped on the knuckles over so small a matter - I think not!

I recall the time when neither of us posted on the board for a while - that was when the NYT banned international discussion here re ME - as anthrax - that was USA Govt Anthrax ...etc

On the disc folks can check out the 'wonderful' posts between Gisterme and Johnson ... what dialogue that was ... 'superb' ... so fantastic publishers rushed to them begging for 'rights' as a potential best seller .... until the guy from the tripe market rushed the deal.

On posting - there are 6billion in the world - any or all of whom may post here - that they don't rush the board may be partly deference to GJ (Gestime/Johnson)... but mainly because many are illiterate in their native tongue and don't have English as a second language. UN USA aid being inadequate.

Makes me wonder if Gisterme hasn't been on the board because (s/he it) was busy with the those A-level papers over in the UK - what a fiasco!

(6 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense