New York Times Readers Opinions
The New York Times
Home
Job Market
Real Estate
Automobiles
News
International
National
Washington
Campaigns
Business
Technology
Science
Health
Sports
New York Region
Education
Weather
Obituaries
NYT Front Page
Corrections
Opinion
Editorials/Op-Ed
Readers' Opinions


Features
Arts
Books
Movies
Travel
Dining & Wine
Home & Garden
Fashion & Style
New York Today
Crossword/Games
Cartoons
Magazine
Week in Review
Multimedia
College
Learning Network
Services
Archive
Classifieds
Book a Trip
Personals
Theater Tickets
Premium Products
NYT Store
NYT Mobile
E-Cards & More
About NYTDigital
Jobs at NYTDigital
Online Media Kit
Our Advertisers
Member_Center
Your Profile
E-Mail Preferences
News Tracker
Premium Account
Site Help
Privacy Policy
Newspaper
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 (5894 previous messages)

rshow55 - 08:35pm Nov 17, 2002 EST (# 5895 of 5900) 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.

http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7a163/170 from March 2001 has a discussion along those lines.

rshow55 - 08:40pm Nov 17, 2002 EST (# 5896 of 5900) 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.

5795-96 rshow55 11/15/02 10:49am mentions that Saddam, a leader in difficulties, might even be able to use his power to help me - as many other leaders could, as well.

It occurs to me that both Saddam and I could use a good negotiating lawyer on their side. My guess is that his should be French.

4635 rshow55 9/18/02 9:26am ... 4635 rshow55 9/18/02 9:26am
4635 rshow55 9/18/02 9:26am ... 4635 rshow55 9/18/02 9:26am

almarst2002 - 08:58pm Nov 17, 2002 EST (# 5897 of 5900)

Force Above Law: The New International Disorder? - http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/02.07/0711ongforce.htm

" some coercion occurs - whenever law is really necessary at all."

The law is coercive by definition. And is acceptable as long as it is applied universaly and equaly.

But, when applied selectively, it becomes an instrument of oppression.

Do you argue that Iraq should accept the selectively applied law because it lost the war?

Iraq was forced to agree to humiliating conditions after the war. Just like Serbia. I think its in US criminal law to reject the statements issued under the pressure. I also believe, its a part of International Law to deem the coerced treaties illegal.

rshow55 - 09:08pm Nov 17, 2002 EST (# 5898 of 5900) 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, from where we are, Iraq would be most well advised to do what it has said it would do. For reasons of morality, and law - considering everthing - in a world that is plainly imperfect.

Saddam has a few imperfections, too.

More Messages Recent Messages (2 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