New York Times Readers Opinions
The New York Times
Job Market
Real Estate
New York Region
NYT Front Page
Readers' Opinions

Dining & Wine
Home & Garden
Fashion & Style
New York Today
Week in Review
Learning Network
Book a Trip
Theater Tickets
Premium Products
NYT Store
NYT Mobile
E-Cards & More
About NYTDigital
Jobs at NYTDigital
Online Media Kit
Our Advertisers
Your Profile
E-Mail Preferences
News Tracker
Premium Account
Site Help
Privacy Policy
Home Delivery
Customer Service
Electronic Edition
Media Kit
Community Affairs
Text Version
TipsGo to Advanced Search
Search Options divide
go to Member Center Log Out

 [F] 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.

Earliest Messages Previous Messages Recent Messages Outline (5119 previous messages)

mazza9 - 07:58pm Oct 22, 2002 EST (# 5120 of 5174)
"Quae cum ita sunt" Caesar's Gallic Commentaries

Robert: Are you really that stupid? Grotius laid down the first treatise on International Law over 400 years ago. In war there are winners and losers. The winnner sets the terms!

A state of war exists between the UN and Iraq and North Korea. These are facts that you choose to ignore. Hostilities in the case of Desert Storm and the Korean War ceased when the truce was negotiated. The cessation of hostilities is subject to the terms of the truce agreement and should one of the parties fail to meet their obligation hostilities can begin again.

The justification for reinstating hostilities in the case of the Iraq war are the fact that they did not live up to their end of the bargain. Oh, they're trying to. Answer me this question, (you won't but hey we know the type of person you really are!) Why did it take 11 years for Iraq to return the Kuwait national archives it had taken? What took so long? There is a great deal of controversy regarding inspections for WMD. The loser doesn't get to dictate the terms but Iraq trys anyway. They insist that their sovereignty must be appreciated isn't it a bit hypocritcal that thier invasion of a UN member nation was a violation of Kuwait's sovereignty?

Robert you are a fool and I enjoy being able to measure myself against the people of your ilk who just don't get it. and you little dog lchic, too!!!

rshow55 - 10:16pm Oct 22, 2002 EST (# 5121 of 5174) Delete Message
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.

mazza9 10/22/02 7:58pm . . . deciding when and if to go to war is, and always has been, a matter of discretion.

Let's grant, just for the limited purpose of argument right here, that is, as a hypothetical subject to further checking, that as a matter of law

"A state of war exists between the U.N. and Iraq and North Korea.

That is the U.N. and NOT the United States.

The United States fought both wars as a part of an alliance of member states - - within the organization of the United Nations , and under UN rules.

It is important that the UN decide what to do - - not a United States which acts, far too often like Sparta - and with something too often close to Spartan "honor."

mazza9 10/22/02 7:58pm - - shows a savage lack of empathy and proportion - and it is stances like yours, attitudes like yours, narrownesses like yours - that are isolating and dishonoring the United States.

. . . . . .

On the issue of your judgement - not so long ago I recieved an email from you that included this:

. "My Space University legislative proposal is being distributed. Every "kid" that I pose the question, "Would you like to live and study IN SPACE at Space University cries out with joy and expectation. We CAN make it happen. Let's not take no for an answer."

Only an idiot would make such a proposal, considering the realities and costs involved. The proposal does, however, calibrate what your judgements about the worthiness of "missile defense" amounts to. That is - no worth at all.

mazza9 - 10:36pm Oct 22, 2002 EST (# 5122 of 5174)
"Quae cum ita sunt" Caesar's Gallic Commentaries

"Only an idiot would make such a proposal".

A University with such high goals and aspirations may be idiotic to you, but would you rather see children aspire to new heights or to the historical lows that have been the measure of mankind's baser pursuits? Would I rather see Ballet Dancers in Space or mindless minions of a murderous dictator spewing propoganda in the name of a religion that they profess is a religion of peace? I'm for the dancer in orbit!

The UN, as founded, was to be the best hope for eliminating the need for war and formulating the means by which all member states could live and prosper in peaceful pursuits. No more colonialism. No more dictators. Freedom and justice were the hoped for end results.

Now, the UN sponsors a commission on racism and brands Israel as a racist country. Meanwhile, Zimbabwe and other African countries continue to pracitce SLAVERY! Oh did I forget to mention the 6th Century, (BC or AD. doesn't matter), tribalism which led to a million deaths, (genocide anyone), in Rawanda! You have no sense of history, but then you have no sense so, logically speaking, you have no sense...stupid!

Name calling is fruitless in your case since you demonstrate your ignorance much better than I could describe it. Go away, and take your little pal lchic. Empathy....if you wanted to demonstrate empathy you would stop with the frivolus, ignorant posts...and you lap dog lchic too!

More Messages Recent Messages (52 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Post Message
 Your Preferences

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  / Missile Defense

Home | Back to Readers' Opinions Back to Top

Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Privacy Policy | Contact Us