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 (5450 previous messages)

rshow55 - 04:06pm Nov 4, 2002 EST (# 5451 of 5457) 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.

I'm not ready with much - though I do see some things that look promising. But this much ought to be clear. Peacemaking, after a longstanding mess - is complicated in a good many ways.

It makes sense to ask - could the human groups involved cooperate at the level of complexity required about anything?

I think the answer, right now, is clearly no - and it is worthwhile thinking about how that answer might be changed to "yes" - about something practical, and important to the groups involved.

I'm "war gaming" the notion that, in ways that matter, the Koreas, China, and perhaps some SE Asian countries and Taiwan should get together and "attack" Japan. Not in the starkest military sense - but in ways that would matter.

Just an idea - but it is something that the nations involved might agree on - in ways that matter.

And it would be a complicated enough task that if before it were done, or even well planned - a lot of lines of communication and cooperation would come into being.

Maybe even enough to sort out the military standoff.

Ideally, Japan might be coerced into coming up with the money and resources needed to sort out some of N. Korea's economic problems. Better them than us, after all.

Back within two hours.

rshow55 - 04:12pm Nov 4, 2002 EST (# 5452 of 5457) 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.

Rape Camp

by Dawn Riley

rshow55 - 05:52pm Nov 4, 2002 EST (# 5453 of 5457) 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.

Postings originally from this thread, that have been reposted on the Guardian-Talk thread Mankind's Inhumanity to Man and Woman - As natural as human goodness? . . (links work)

I'm wishing, as I often do, that my old friend and partner Stephen Jay Kline were still alive. Steve and I worked together on two things - some math, and the logic of complex, and especially socio-technical systems. The part on sociotechnical systems is in large part written in Steve's

I'm going through some things I hope President Putin knows, in that book.

Steve wrote me a recommendation letter, that includes some things helicopter designers and other technical people ought to know, in and I gave a eulogy of Steve in his memorial service in Stanford Chapel that a lot of people liked.

I wish I could talk to Steve now, and ask

    " What could we tell Putin, that might help him do his job - a job that he has to do well, in the interest of the world? "
I can imagine some of the things Steve might say, and warn me to check, and I'm taking a little time to think about them.

rshowalter - 05:31pm Mar 17, 2001 EST (#1128

When we apply SIMPLE models of structure to circumstances that have a more complicated structure than we are thinking of, we can get into trouble.

We can fail to see how thing work.

And we can be misled by thinking we see "contradictions" where there are no logical contradictions -- though there may be aesthetic or moral tensions.

A complex system can be two "contradictory" things at the same time -- in different places within the larger structure -- without contradiction.

Bertrand Russell got caught up with this one -- but for complicated circumstances, and for dealing with complicated histories, it is an essential thing to know.

It you know it -- solutions that seem "classified out of existence" are seen, and these solutions can be real.

Some moral points can get clarified, too.

More Messages Recent Messages (4 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  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