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 (6166 previous messages)

rshow55 - 03:50pm Nov 22, 2002 EST (# 6167 of 6171) 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.

almarst2002 11/22/02 1:54pm quotes my line that perfection about checking rshow55 11/22/02 1:45pm . . . "perfection isn't possible." . . . and asks me

Do you think we are moving to close or increase the gap?

I think we are moving so that the possibility of closing that gap is greater than ever before - and there are a number of steps - some, it seems to me, involving this thread - that show ways in which things are getting more open - and ways checking could become much more effective - without great effort or risk - but with some of each.

At the same time - the technique of deception is advancing too - since the incentives to work to push the state of that art are so great everywhere - including the United States.

The idea that deception can't be discussed or suspected - of that deception, if found, forever bars a player from function - - has long been absurd - and we should get rid of it. It bars all players, which is absurd.

We need to make the reasonable assumption that we live, and have to live, along a trust-distrust continuum. And institute checks when they are needed. Getting those checks in place is partly a technical problem.

You asked for a judgement call:

Do you think we are moving to close or increase the gap?

My judgement is that, just now, truthful dealing may be getting a little more common - but that we are living in a time where it is important that we do much better - and we can. We have good reason to be afraid that deception could get much worse. That could easily happen, unless people of good faith AND some power and courage take steps to clean some things up.

Missile Defense would be a good place to sort out a number of things - both on missile defense - and on checking technique - and it has been discussed a lot on this board. The patterns set out below would be practical, if leaders of nation states would want them to be, but not otherwise. If leaders of nation states are so concerned about American power, but are unwilling to question it at the moderate level it would take to get key facts checked, on this or some other subject matter - it seems to me that they have but little justification for blaming America for over-reaching. .

5841 rshow55 11/16/02 4:03pm

Challenge, questions, and invokation of the need for force: 727 rshow55 3/20/02 7:58pm ... 728 rshow55 3/20/02 8:32pm
729 rshow55 3/20/02 8:37pm

Counterchallenge:
7643 gisterme 3/22/02 12:34pm . (Note: Add funding)

Comment and response:
779 manjumicha2001 3/23/02 1:28am ... 782-783 rshow55 3/23/02 10:15am

84 rshow55 3/2/02 10:52am

almarst2002 - 03:54pm Nov 22, 2002 EST (# 6168 of 6171)

He will appear in as many clown shows as he can

Does it mean the TWO CLOWNS will appear in twice the number of SHOWS or twice in each SHOW? - http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/11/21/1037697805270.html

almarst2002 - 03:59pm Nov 22, 2002 EST (# 6169 of 6171)

Bush's Life of Deception The major news media has finally reached the conclusion that George W. Bush can be "malleable" with the truth, especially in his comments about Iraq. But the problem of Bush's dishonesty is far deeper, tracing back through his privileged life in which there has been little accountability for lies and deception. November 4, 2002 - http://www.consortiumnews.com/2002/110402a.html

lunarchick - 04:05pm Nov 22, 2002 EST (# 6170 of 6171)

The dot trail connecting the Bali Terrorists ... who'd been happily blowing up churches unchecked over past years is picking up the bad-guys ... the dots move north throught the Indonesian archipelago
[ Fragile archipelago. Indonesia, a country of more than 13,000 islands and hundreds of ethnic groups bbc ]

through to Malaysia ...

Still waiting to hear Muslim Leaderships really condem terrorism ....

nothing here ...

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