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 (6002 previous messages)

rshow55 - 08:07pm Nov 20, 2002 EST (# 6003 of 6023) 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.

With discussion - in conditions where answers can converge - it may happen that the initial suggestion of a wrong (but complicated and detailed enough) answer can lead - step by step - to a clearly explainable and provably right answer.

So even if I happen to be wrongheaded about something (and that could happen) - if I'm involved in a system with proper feedback and checking - right answers could still result.

lunarchick - 08:19pm Nov 20, 2002 EST (# 6004 of 6023)

"People are hungry for leaders who offer more than empty slogans and racial hatred."

" _______________ , instead of bringing out the best in the citizens of this country, has appealed to their worst instincts. What it means therefore is that the country is headed in the wrong direction, fast slipping behind, and in the process losing our way. And all we have out of this mess is _________________ policy paralysis. No vision, no action, just neglect, selfishness and division.

almarst2002 - 08:20pm Nov 20, 2002 EST (# 6005 of 6023)

A massive database that the government will use to monitor every purchase made by every American citizen is a necessary tool in the war on terror, the Pentagon said Wednesday. - http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,70992,00.html

Empire strikes back?

rshow55 - 08:22pm Nov 20, 2002 EST (# 6006 of 6023) 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.

There are plenty of things to be said against the Bush administration.

If only some people at NATO, or senior people in Russia or China - asked for checking - not too indirectly - a lot could be sorted out.

rshow55 - 08:27pm Nov 20, 2002 EST (# 6007 of 6023) 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.

3316 rshow55 7/28/02 7:07pm - - I've sometimes been emphatic about the matter - at some personal risk.

One can expect only so much courage and directness for journalists - and the Times has shown a lot. With some interest from leaders - some real checking might happen.

On the Kennedy assasination, for instance. And some other things as well.

But just now, if the question is "Should Saddam disarm as he's agreed to do?" the answer is yes.

almarst2002 - 08:30pm Nov 20, 2002 EST (# 6008 of 6023)

"Why, in your moral terms shouldn't we insist that Saddam disarm, as he has repeatedly agreed to do?"

As I mentioned before, the Agreement signed under the tread of force is not only immoral. It is illigal.

But, back to the question of disarmament. I am all for disarmament unless it undermines the ability for self defence.

The arms race may have just two reasons - Agressive or Defencive. Now, lets compare the number of Agressive wars Iraq and US had conducted since Iraq became independent.

More Messages Recent Messages (15 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