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 (5572 previous messages)

rshow55 - 08:38am Nov 10, 2002 EST (# 5573 of 5575) 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 think that, within the limits on "consistency" that come in multiply articulated circumstances, Iraq was trying to be sincere, thinking it was sincere when it wrote this:

"After so many years of fear from war, the threat of war and suffering, the people of Iraq and their government in Baghdad are eager for peace. We have no intention of attacking anyone, now or in the future, with weapons of any kind. If we are attacked, we will surely defend ourselves with all means possible. But bear in mind that we have no nuclear or biological or chemical weapons, and we have no intention of acquiring them.

"We are not asking the people of the United States or of any member state of the United Nations to trust in our word, but to send the weapons inspectors to our country to look wherever they wish unconditionally.

from Iraq States Its Case by MOHAMMED ALDOURI

That passage says "you don't have to trust us - - you can check us."

And steps that represent major change have been made:

. Iraq Announces Amnesty for Its Prisoners

. Abrupt Amnesty at Iraqi Prisons: A Joy for Many, Grief for Some By JOHN F. BURNS with ( Images of Sudden Freedom and Frenzy )

reports an institutional change of great consequence.

The angry words and concerns are sincere, too.

Arabs Expect Iraq to Submit to U.N. By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Filed at 4:59 a.m. ET

includes vital and reasonable Iraqi concerns, that must be and can be made consistent with the recent Security Council resolution:

" . . . . Iraqi acceptance would depend on the guarantees that ``inspectors would act in a neutral ... and objective way, respecting strictly all the resolutions of the Security Council particularly those with regard to the respect of Iraqi sovereignty.''

"Iraq had accused inspectors who were in the country during 1991-1998 of acting as spies.

"The new resolution gives inspectors unrestricted access to any site, and that could remain a point of dispute. Iraq insists on respect for its sovereignty, an argument it has used in the past to restrict access to Saddam's palaces.

It needs to be clear what Iraq is talking about, and cares so much about - when the word "sovereignty" is used. It is a key to the working of his state - or any other state. The issue is status - in a world where most of the day by day decisions and actions taken are based on people doing "the expected" - doing what they think is right in terms of status relations and expectations linked to them.

There is a clear sense in which the status of the Iraqi government must be maintained in ways that permit it to function - and should be maintained.

Gracefully, and without compromising the reality of disarmament.

rshow55 - 08:44am Nov 10, 2002 EST (# 5574 of 5575) 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.

Not that I believe everything the Iraqis say.

Adults need secrets, lies, and fictions
To live within their contradictions.

But when things go wrong,
And knock about
Folks get together
And work it out.

. . .

When it matters enough, some past secrets, lies and fictions have to be set straight.

Without forgettig that we all have some faults, and have perpetrated some indirectnesses.

More Messages Recent Messages (1 following message)

 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