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
(5044 previous messages)
- 10:39am Oct 19, 2002 EST (#
5045 of 5047)
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.
On mechanics - and new possibilities:
5/16/02 3:34pm includes this:
lchic 5/16/02 2:55pm -- the model surely needs to be
connected to capabilities that permit communication and
decision making that needs to be done. Interactions with
staffed organizations are a part of that. To "cover the bases"
on what is done is complicated - but if we do it clearly - and
sort out problems -- we may be able to get closure on problems
that have been intractable before.
lchic 5/16/02 3:16pm asks
How could world bodies assist in creating
better situations in their homeland countries to lessen
The task is complicated - but we can deal with the
complications involved better now than we used to.
in MD2229 rshow55 5/15/02 9:36am there's this:
Lchic and I did a 2 hour, 70 post session on negotiation in
the middle east that I think summarizes a good deal about new
opportunities in conflict resolution made possible by the
internet . . . The session goes from http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.eea14e1/1253
. It includes many links to this NYT Missile Defense thread.
The suggestions are directed, by way of example, to Friedman
and Fisk, but are flexible, general, and inexpensive. I
believe that if the staffed organizations of Europe, the US,
and other countries thought about these opportunities, and
adapted them their needs and responsibilities, the good things
being talked about and hoped for about the "end of the cold
war" could become real, in realistic, nutsy-boltsy,
comfortable human ways.
A friend of mine who is an IT professional looked at
and made comments that I thought were very helpful.
He's John Mark Heumann of Houston Tx. I'm taking the liberty
of posting an outline he wrote - both because it illustrates
how complex things are -- what tools are available -- and how
little chance there is for a "meeting of the minds" in a short
Heumann's Analysis of Web Thread is set out in
5/16/02 3:39pm to 2250 rshow55
Human interactions ARE very complicated (the ones we take
for granted, living our lives, would be very difficult to
describe) and logically it may be "easier" to "not
listen" -- "not notice the hanging details" and "not get to
closure." I'd have some comments about what Mark outlined
above -- but he isn't making any false difficulties than I can
see - nor false distinctions.
Does that mean that complex cooperation is hopeless when
there are difficulties?
It means nothing of the sort. It means that sorting things
out takes work - - including intellectual work -- and
that the job of illustrating, discussing, focusing, agreeing -
is a complicated job that only human beings can do.
(2 following messages)
New York Times on the Web Forums