New York Times on the Web Forums
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
(5005 previous messages)
- 01:04pm Oct 18, 2002 EST (#
5006 of 5011)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed
Australia - Bali - rememberance
I'm the hot wind from the desert
I'm the black soil of the plains
mountains and the valleys
I'm the drought and flooding
I am the rock, I am the sky
when they run
The spirit of this great land
Day of the Wattle-a boutonniere
- 01:33pm Oct 18, 2002 EST (#
5007 of 5011)
"Find the Boeing Jumbo Jet!"
Suspend Laws of Physics!
truth the media is forbidden to tell you
Congressional Record of Testimony for the Oklahoma City
Federal Building Bombing Damage Analysis
- 02:49pm Oct 18, 2002 EST (#
5008 of 5011)
The story regarding uniformed brass' conflict with Rummy's
gang and how Rummy was about to lose his job before 9/11
changed the dymnamics in his favor has been pretty wide spread
public knowledge. Obviously you are too lazy to dig any deeper
than your CNN headlines of the moment so why should I bother.
This is getting way too boring and tiresome....
- 04:47pm Oct 18, 2002 EST (#
5009 of 5011)
Latest news on NK nukes:
Nk is sitting on 4 million tone of Uranium reserve. And has
been using a laser-based enriched uranium seperation
technology which is far more compact and effective than
centrifuge based one. Now the source of this information is
Federation of American Scientists.
I just doubt NK would be content to make "one or two
primitive nukes" as NYT and WP have been reporting for the
last 8 years. Btw, contrary to NYT and WP's interpretation of
NK official's statement that they have "more powerful stuff"
to mean just biological and chemical weapons (which are
certianly NOT more powerful than atomic bombs, duh), Michael
Levy of FAS thinks that they referred to hydorgen bombs which
require both plutonium based atomic bomb as the trigger and
bigger uranium based shell to create the fusion reaction.
Some of NK's recent activities are geared toward hydrogen
bomb making.....not conventional nukes which after all in
their view are old news by at least 10 years.
- 05:06pm Oct 18, 2002 EST (#
5010 of 5011)
"Quae cum ita sunt" Caesar's Gallic
Mel Brooke's "History of the World. Part 1" introduces the
regal perogative which has been observed throughout history.
As the French King he says, "It's good to be the king!" When a
young lady rejects his advances he reminds her that he has her
father in the dungeon. The impasse is broken and the options
are elucidated when he suggests to her that she must choose,
"Hump or Death!"
The diplomatic reality of a Kim Il Jong or Saddam Hussein
with a nuclear caability is no joke. They've killed their own
children to acquire these weapons. To what end?
You commie pinkos vilify the United States because you are
jealous of NK and Iraq's power. You know that were you "king
of the world" the Titanic wouldn't sink! Good luck! I, for
one, don't want to see anyone dead from this folly. The United
States has done it before in several world wars and we'll do
it again to save mankind!!!
(1 following message)
New York Times on the Web Forums