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 (5661 previous messages)

rshow55 - 11:57am Nov 12, 2002 EST (# 5662 of 5671) 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 believe that Saddam has done some good things, but also made some mistakes, including moral mistakes. Including some very expensive and bloody ones. We've made some mistakes, too. If we did some simple things, we could fix a lot - and have a much better future for ourselves and others in the world. That's surely true of Saddam, as well.
5403 rshow55 10/31/02 10:28am

lunarchick - 12:17pm Nov 12, 2002 EST (# 5663 of 5671)

There are always opportunities to really LOOK at the system, to reform the system, to throw away the dated and outmoded.

All nations have an agenda, have priorities, have real demanding needs.

China, then Russia put in - the basic rule of law - a foundation for function

Saddam should be looking to make Iraq a C21 nation ... make a list ... what should be scrapped, what improved, what implemented - with time frame.

There's always positive work to be done.

The current situation could be turned into a WIN WIN situation ... Iraq could become a country of 'peace' ... could set itself goals and objectives to fit with a NEW VISION.

Iraq should say .... Here's a ten year plan ....

    (should think - if the OIL isn't wanted - then how could the nation be put together so that it CAN function and give people a decent funded carry-on - give them PAID work)
So what would the structure of a TEN YEAR PLAN for Iraq look like .... that's where Arab world thinking should be ... not lost in rhetoric!

rshow55 - 12:39pm Nov 12, 2002 EST (# 5664 of 5671) 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 know I couldn't be permitted. But what an interesting problem for me to do some staff work on - - if I had an AEA-like organization !

To give a sense of why Casey wanted to get AEA-like organizations working - for implementing very large scale socio-techinical change - here's a set of questions, that at one level or another, always have to be answered, one way of another.

Sometimes, to get solutions - you have to "strip them away" at some levels of detail - get some things straight - and then get the answers put into a real organization in real detail.

A man I respect a great deal sent me these questions:

Questions that Bob Showalter will be asked and will have to answer:

1. Vision: What do you see as the ultimate result of your efforts?

2. Assumption: What do you assume regarding the outcome of your efforts?

3. Mission: What have you committed yourself to accomplishing?

4. Strength: What do you bring to this effort, in terms of personal qualities and resources?

5. Weakness: What does this effort require that you may not be able to provide?

6. Opportunity: What opportunities do you see for advancing your project?

7. Threat: What forces or circumstances exist that threaten to hinder your project?

8. Goal: What do you want to accomplish?

9. Strategy: How do you propose to accomplish those goals? What alternative strategies exist?

10. Critical success factor: What must you achieve if you expect to succeed? What will kill the project if you fail to achieve it?

11. Objective: What milestones have you set for measuring your progress toward your goal?

12. Policy: What rules of practice have you set for yourself?

13. Tactic: What methods are you going to use to advance toward your goals? When and how are you going to apply them?

14. Task: What actions will you take?

15. Who are you ?

16. Why should I listen?

17. Why should I listen to you ?

18. Why do you address me ?

19. Why do you address me now ?

20. Why do you address me in this way ?

21. What are the facts?

22. What conclusions do you draw from those facts?

23. What evidence do you have to substantiate those conclusions?

- - -

Good questions. Sometimes you have to adress them "in stages" - and the stages have to have structure. For instance - if you're trying to deal with a problem in math - solving the math problem - and explaining it so it works - are different jobs.

Making peace has some of the same complications. Casey and I talked about them a lot. He was stumped on some key things - and I think I solved a few of the problems he was stumped about - as he had asked me to do.

More Messages Recent Messages (7 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