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 (5471 previous messages)

rshow55 - 10:30am Nov 5, 2002 EST (# 5472 of 5478) 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.

Maybe with modifications.

When the NK's, to a degree, tried to "come in through the New York Times" they were following advice that a close associate of Kissinger, and a friend-boss-mentor of mine gave me after quite a lot of careful thought. That friend-boss-mentor was Bill Casey.

The reason was that the NYT was complicated enough and well enough connected to have a chance to come up with something workable - with logical reserves - up front and back channel - enought that both understanding and closure might be possible.

If I hadn't drawn George Johnson as my contact -if it had been somebody with better judgement - it might have worked like a charm.

The analogies in the NK mess aren't perfect - but they seem to me to be reasonable.

Not that I think the TIMES could or should negotiate with the NKs alone. That would be unstable, if anybody with real power wanted it to be unstable. That means it would be unstable.

This would be stable, and permit a resolution that was stable:

There should be a detailed discussion, along the lines of the discussion lchic and I described in "Anything on Anyting" rshow55 10/30/02 11:34am - - using the internet, and with some assistance from several other journalistic organizations, from several other countries - and with enough private funding (from sources with lines to the administration) - so that the complications, backgrounds and facts were clear - at the various levels that would matter to the people involved.

If that were added to other negotiation lines (not substituted -- added ) - it seems to me likely that something like the "Perry plan" might actually have enough backup, and feedback, to work this time.

manjumicha - 11:10am Nov 5, 2002 EST (# 5473 of 5478)

Perry plan worked.....until rummy and chenny and wolfy vetoed it...and had boy george parrot it out in public...:-)

rshow55 - 11:46am Nov 5, 2002 EST (# 5474 of 5478) 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.

Maybe so . . but stability is an issue - and with the world as dangerous and muddled as it is -- we could use solutions that work better in practice than the Perry plan "worked".

I'm off for a while. Gotta vote.

After the election, whatever happens - some kinds of negotiations will be logically simpler than they are just now.

lunarchick - 12:31pm Nov 5, 2002 EST (# 5475 of 5478)

Why denial of social history in above posts wrt

    1. reprisals of allied armies against women - Germany 1945
    Museum of Hiram: Library: CIA Bibliography
    73. Veil: the Secret Wars of the CIA / Bob Woodward Simon and Schuster (c) 1987
    543 total pages, 485 pages text, 2 page Central American Covert-Action Chronology, 3 pages acknowledgments, 30 page index, 16 pages photographs
    Focusing on the tenure of Director of Central Intelligence William J. Casey, 28 January, 1981 thru 29 January 1987
    William Casey
    William Casey was CIA Director during the Reagan/Bush Administration. He died 2 days before he was to testify about his and others' involvement in the Iran/Contra scandal.

More Messages Recent Messages (3 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