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 (5460 previous messages)

rshow55 - 07:30pm Nov 4, 2002 EST (# 5461 of 5470) 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.

Never said that the N. Koreans were nice guys.

It is stupid not to talk to them.

I did not say that they should be trusted.

Should G.W.Bush be trusted? Why?

To sort out problems, including problems of peace (and the smaller related muddles of the missile defense boongoggle) people have to face the truth, tell the truth, and avoid misinformation. When right answers really count, they have to "connect the dots" ( MD1055 rshow55 4/4/02 6:54am) so that patterns emerge -- and to check those patterns.

Here are some OpEd pieces by Paul Krugman quoted on the NYT Missile Defense thread:

The Big Lie

Bad Heir Day

The Great Divide

The Smoke Machine

Connect the Dots

At Long Last?

The White Stuff

Losing Latin America

The Angry People

A number of links discussing Krugman's pieces are set out in MD1741 rshow55 4/24/02 9:37am

The question of a "vast right-wing conspiracy" is raised, and given focus, in .

The Smoke Machine and Connect the Dots by PAUL KRUGMAN

and most recently and explicitly in

The Pitt Principle by Paul Krugman

William Webster was chosen to head a crucial new accounting oversight board precisely because industry lobbyists believed he would be ineffectual.

I believe that the "American Empire" is as large as it is, and has some of the characteristics that it does, because the interest of the United States, as a nation, has diverged from the interests of a "military-industrial-political complex" constructed to fight the Cold War, that has taken a dangerous degree of control over US government affairs since that time. The American "missile defense" program is interesting for some of the same reasons that the Enron affair b . . . is interesting.

The "missile defense" programs are nonsensical and corrupt, in the senses that ought to matter either technically or militarily, and illustrates broader corruptions that concern the whole world, because American power is as great as it now is, and is used as it now is.

Checking on these issues is important - but for it to happen, some leaders of nation states are going to have to be interested - as I believe they should be, because it is risky to be led, and to defer, to an administration that is taking positions that go wrong, and produce unnecessary risks, costs, and fighting, again and again.

MD1076 rshow55 4/4/02 12:20pm

MD1077 rshow55 4/4/02 12:21pm ends with this:

"I believe that I'm doing, as nearly as it possibly can be done, exactly what Bill Casey would want me to do now, for the good of the United States of America and the decency of the world.

mazza9 - 08:06pm Nov 4, 2002 EST (# 5462 of 5470)
"Quae cum ita sunt" Caesar's Gallic Commentaries


You continue to invoke the name Bill Casey. How do you expect anyone to verify/connect the dots concerning you pronouncements?

You're as aimless as the situation that you avow. Confusion is the hallmark of your posts. Is that the means and methods of discerning the truth?

More Messages Recent Messages (8 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